Forum Topics

If U R concerned about Pollution - THIRD Concrete Plant for Horn Lane Goods Rail Yard.

Ealing is "off patch" from Acton I know, but if you have a concern about rising and unnecessary Pollution then please OBJECT to the utterly ridiculous THIRD Concrete Batching Plant in Horn Lane Goods Rail Yard.Local concerned residents and particularly families with young children and/or those suffering any breathing difficulties are invited to OBJECT ASAP to this utterly ridiculous THIRD Concrete Batching Plant to be shoehorned into the already chronically congested and highly polluting Horn Lane Goods Rail Yard.Inspiration for the wording in your Objection can be gleaned from previous Objections lodged against the current two existing polluting Concrete Batching Plants.Please assist in OBJECTING to this wanton further pollution of a residential family area.I thank you.    😁THIRD and Proposed YEOMANS CONCRETE BATCHING PLANT details at:-https://pam.ealing.gov.uk/online-applications/https://pam.ealing.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=RHH84EJMN5800    Installation of a temporary, rail served, mobile ready-mixed concrete batching plant with ancillary infrastructure to serve the High Speed Two development.    Yeoman Aggregates Acton Goods Yard 305 Horn Lane Acton Ealing W3 0BP    Ref. No: 223766FUL | Received: Wed 31 Aug 2022 | Validated: Wed 31 Aug 2022 | Status: Pending ConsiderationThe SECOND and existing QUATTRO CONCRETE PLANT    Construction of a rail served concrete batching plant (CBP), rail served cement storage facility (4no cement / PFA storage silos), workshop, modular office/welfare facilities, aggregate storage bays, substation and other ancillary structures and parking areas to enable use of site for concrete batching, cement storage and distribution, and associated administrative activities (proposals to enable permanent relocation of existing CBP operation, workshop and administrative activities from Quattro site at Park Royal).    Land Forming Part Of Acton Goods Yard 305 Horn Lane Acton W3 0BP    Ref. No: 191885FUL | Received: Fri 26 Apr 2019 | Validated: Mon 22 Jul 2019 | Status: Granted with S106 conditionsThe FIRST and existing HANSON CONCRETE PLANT      P/2013/3475Soft Landscaping  https://pam.ealing.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?keyVal=ZZZW6JJMTA796&activeTab=summary    Retention of replacement Concrete Batching Plant    Hanson Concretes Horn Lane Goods Yard 305 Horn Lane Acton W3 0BP    Ref. No: P/2013/3475 | Received: Tue 06 Aug 2013 | Validated: Tue 06 Aug 2013 | Status: Conditional ConsentForum Home

Rosco White ● 1116d3 Comments ● 1115d

They're all as bad as each other .......

Mayor breaks silence to say he won’t publish #PennReportPosted on October 8, 2022 by insidecroydonCROYDON IN CRISIS: Part-time Perry took four days to respond to questions over the refusal to publish a controversial report, only to confirm that he is not in charge of the council. By STEVEN DOWNESFour days after he was approached to comment on why Croydon Council has failed to act on any of the recommendations contained in the Penn Report, and part-time Mayor Jason Perry has finally broken his silence.The Conservative Mayor was elected in May on a manifesto that promised to sweep away the malpractice and mismanagement of the previous Labour administration. But nearly six months after taking office, Perry continues to withhold the Penn Report, which was commissioned from the Local Government Association in 2020 to investigate possible wrong-doing in the lead-up to Croydon’s financial collapse.Inside Croydon broke the news on Tuesday that LGA official Richard Penn had recommended getting the borough’s elected councillors to consider calling in the police to investigate possible misconduct in public office, as well as the possibility of trying to recover the £437,000 gold-plated pay-off handed to discredited former chief exec Jo Negrini for breach of contract.For four days, Mayor Perry was silent, ignoring our invitation for him to comment.Then, last night, Perry issued a statement via Twitter. There’s no mention of the Penn Report on the council’s website’s news pages, although they do give over a hunk of bandwidth to claims that Perry is cleaning up the borough (of graffiti, but not civic incompetence).Perry’s belated response to our Penn Report revelations confirms, once again, that he may be in office, but he is not in control.In office, but not in control: the person actually in charge of the council is on the rightPerry has failed to take decisive action and is cowering behind the excuses for non-publication and inaction offered by the council’s current chief exec, Katherine Kerswell. As Inside Croydon predicted before the Mayoral referendum, having a directly elected mayor is just #ABitLessShit.So while The Guardian, Private Eye, the BBC London news website and The Municipal Journal have this week all followed Inside Croydon’s lead, Mayor Perry decided to stay schtum and instead rely on the dubious advice from the same council legal department that was, in some large measure, responsible for getting the borough into its current mess (albeit that the major player in that regard, lawyer Jacqueline Harris-Baker, who is much criticised in the Penn Report, has long since left the organisation).Perry’s statement simply endorsed the policy of the previous administration, claiming concerns over threatened legal action from those named in the Penn Report.What Perry failed to state on Twitter was that he has this week also endorsed the council’s most senior legal official, Monitoring Officer Stephen Lawrence-Orumwense, in issuing legal threats against this website and its editor.Along with the legal threats, Lawrence-Orumwense demanded that we must return our copy of the Penn Report… thus giving yet more credence to the suggestion that the council – now supported by Mayor Perry – is actively seeking to suppress the report.Perry’s tweet states: “Residents and businesses may be aware that a copy of the Penn Report has been leaked. The council and I cannot comment on the contents of the leaked report without risking tax-payer money through legal challenge…”.Which is, of course, supine nonsense. The council never bats an eyelid about hiring expensive lawyers to front-up at all kinds of tribunals when it is contesting claims brought by the ill-served families of autistic children, or when trying to gag sacked whistle-blowers.For the council to be challenged over the Penn Report, the likes of Negrini or Tony Newman would need to be prepared to face the prospect of standing up in court, possibly in front of a jury of 12 ordinary residents, and to claim that their reputation had in some way been damaged by what had been reported.Just consider that thought for a moment.Clearly, Jason Perry has not.Last night, Perry wrote, “This week’s articles on the Penn Report have reminded us all of the sheer level of dysfunction and mismanagement under the previous administration.“Those failures not only bankrupted the council, they have left a lasting legacy of financial and service destruction which we will continue to feel the effects of for years to come. Many of those financial failures have yet to be resolved, for example the potential £70million loss on Croydon Affordable Homes.“That is why I have always been committed to the full publication of the Penn Report…”, the public want actions, Jase, not more empty words, “… once legal and other processes have been completed so as not to risk yet more tax-payer money.“As Mayor, I am committed to resolving these issues and fixing the council’s finances. That will take time and mean difficult decisions to come but I know together as a community we can get our borough back on track.”But Mayor Perry ain’t publishing the Penn Report.So it looks like Inside Croydon will have to do so, in the interests of the people of Croydon.https://insidecroydon.com/2022/10/08/mayor-breaks-silence-to-say-he-wont-publish-pennreport/

Rosco White ● 1121d1 Comments ● 1121d

Parents for Future to hold pop-up kids wind farm to raise awareness of green energy

Parents for Future are fracked off with the government's new energy strategy and hope you are too.Susan O'Leary from Parents for Future - West London commented: "We are dismayed by the Government's response to the energy crisis - fracking and a huge expansion of new oil and gas fields - as parents we want to make it clear that the answer to the energy and cost of living crisis, goes hand in hand with the answer to the climate crisis. There is no logic in handing out oil and gas licenses to the likes of Shell - the fields won't start producing for years - so won't lower our bills, but will instead create massive emissions, and profits for the oil and gas giants."We deserve an energy strategy that does not side with oil companies over the interests of the people in this country. And a strategy that does NOT prioritise profits over the UK's commitment to reducing the devastating climate impacts of its oil and gas sector. We want a safe and just future for our children".Parents will be making these demands across the country on Friday 23 September, marking the Global Climate Strikes that this year focus on #PeopleNotProfit.Join parents in Ealing at Elthorne Park (W7 2LZ) on September 23rd from 3.30-5pm for a pop-up wind farm as part of Parents for Future's campaign to show our MPs and local communities that we have the power in our hands.The event is a fun family friendly after-school event and will include crafting wind turbines for kids, snacks, games and prizes. All ages are welcome.

Susan O'Leary ● 1142d31 Comments ● 1136d

What will the cycling lobby make of this?

Proposal to increase custodial sentences for cyclists who kill pedestrians.Cyclists who kill pedestrians could face tougher sentences under a planned new law for England, Scotland and Wales.The move proposed by Transport Secretary Grant Shapps will close a loophole which means they can only currently be jailed for two years.He said it will "impress on cyclists the real harm they can cause when speed is combined with lack of care".Causing death by dangerous driving carries a maximum sentence of 14 years.Death by careless driving has a maximum sentence of five years.The government launched a review into whether an equivalent offence to causing death by dangerous driving was needed for cyclists in 2017.It followed a case where a cyclist was convicted of the 19th Century offence of "wanton or furious driving".Mr Shapps said a "selfish minority" of cyclists believe they are "immune" to red lights."We need to crack down on this disregard for road safety," he wrote in the Daily Mail."Relatives of victims have waited too long for this straightforward measure."Ministers are said to be seeking a "balance" to "encourage cycling... but at the same time ensure that pedestrians are protected from irresponsible cycling behaviour".Under the proposal, a new law of causing death by dangerous cycling would be added to the Transport Bill due before Parliament in the autumn.The Department for Transport said it was "exploring changes to allow dangerous cyclists to be prosecuted more easily and delivering more continuous and direct cycling routes in towns and cities which are physically separated from pedestrians and motor traffic".

Simon Hayes ● 1188d152 Comments ● 1169d

EALING'S CORRUPT COMPLAINTS SERVICE

The Local Government Ombudsman is “disappointed” in the borough’s handling of complaints. I am disgusted. The problem is rooted in the reluctance of our elected representatives to take an interest in the misconduct of council officers.  It is left to officers to police officers.  The assumption is they will behave with impartiality. The evidence is that senior colleagues collude in cover-up to protect one another and betray the public interest in favour of their own. The trick that has become institutionalised in council practice is to claim the complaint has already been dealt with. When asked to demonstrate where and when, they ignore the request. I and neighbours complained about seven officers in succession. The lie (“already dealt with”) was passed down the line.  “Tell one for the team” is the esprit de corps in Ealing’s top offices. The officers still with the council who, it is alleged, have behaved in this way are Ms Reynolds, Ms Harris, and, in a separate matter, Ms Taylor. Between them, the first two control the complaints procedure so it is impossible to make a formal compaint which will survive their maladministration.  The LGO never names the officers whose behaviour gives rise to complaints. We were paid a sum of money when the LGO found the Council guilty of maladministration in a matter we put to it. Who paid?  We did.  You did. It came from Council Tax.  The offending officers got away without a bad mark against their name.Who is responsible for the present, not-fit-for-purpose complaints system?For one, Mason.   He promised transparency in the Council’s dealings with residents: “Do email me to raise specific issues about the Borough”. I drew the corrupted state of the complaints service with examples to his attention 12.6.21.   Despite three reminders (19.7.21, 18.8.21, 20.9.21), I have not received even the courtesy of an acknowledgement, let alone a reply of substance. Not much interest in the behaviour of senior officers from him. He is happy to turn a blind eye to the complaints against them. I have formed the opinion that Mr Mason is a moral fraud, a man who does not keep his word, who cannot be trusted. I put the matter to Mr Read, the officer responsible for the way the Council engages with the public.    I gave summaries of of a number of complaints. He wrote back : “ I have reviewed the case history of the complaints which you refer to. I do not believe that officers have acted improperly. The complaints process has been followed and exhausted.”  This bland catch-all “acquittal” was mere opinion unsupported by analysis of the behaviour of the officers involved. It was untenable.  I pointed out in the case of Ms Harris that the Council itself had been obliged to apologise for her delay (four months) in dealing with my complaint. (In fact, she never dealt with it at all.) He asked what specific matter we wanted the Council to deal with.  We said the behaviour of Ms Reynolds when she responded to a complaint against a senior colleague. We put it in the form of a questionnaire about Ms Reynolds’ behaviour.  We have waited a fortnight for a response. Give him another week. Then we shall conclude that answering our questions would have led him to the truth about his colleague Reynolds and so he is dodging them.   it would be interesting and useful if readers of Ealing Today would contribute to the Forum their experiences of Ealing Council’s complaints procedure. These could be forwarded to the Minister for Local Government, asking for Ealing’s complaints service to be taken into special measures. The attempt would at least attract attention to Ealing’s corrupted complaints service. Of course, the unacceptable state of the complaints service is only one feature of the corrupt culture of unaccountability that infects Ealing Council. 

Andrew Farmer ● 1192d16 Comments ● 1183d

Unsolved West London Murders.

Are all the links between Abertillery double child killer Harold Jones and other unsolved murders just coincidences?Here are the facts.(1) Just before Jones was released from prison he repeatedly informed the prison authorities that he did not want to lose the desire to kill. That was the same desire that he admitted that he had in 1921 as a 15 year-old boy.(2) The governor of Maidstone prison from where Jones was eventually released stated in a report: "He is callous but would be the last to admit it. Sad as it may seem I can see no hopeful prospect for Jones in the future." The prison chaplain also reported that he felt Jones was a "no-hoper."Professor Mike Berry, (Consultant Clinical Forensic Psychologist.) visited Abertillery and a number of London locations during the filming of Dark Son - The Hunt for a Serial Killer over a 12 month period. His conclusion was that Harold Jones was the Hammersmith killer. (8 unsolved London murders that were the largest unsolved murders in British criminal history.) He stated that he believed after reviewing all the evidence that Jones after leaving prison had killed again and again,(3) Jones had lived 2 streets away from 3 of the 8 women murder victims in Fulham and Hammersmith as well as 50-100 yards away from murder victim Ignac Ulycz in Putney. The police in the 1960's were not aware of Jones' past and he was never a suspect in any of the murders until after 2008.(4) Jones' own daughter has stated that her father would leave her and her mother at home at the times of the killings and book into Rowton House, a  doss-house in Hammersmith whenever her parents would have a row. The daughter stated that she now believes her father would do this in fear that he may kill his wife in temper. Jones' own son-in-law stated that "There's no smoke without fire is there?"(5) One woman prostitute told the police that she had got into a punter's car with a man who showed her a London Metropolitan Police warrant card. She panicked and quickly exited the car. The man offered her some cash. Was the man Harold Jones using his father-in-laws police warrant card. (His father-in-law John Widdows was a retired London Metropolitan police officer.) The woman some time later became the 7th of the 8 murdered women.(6) Harold Jones stored the bodies of Abertillery murder victims Freda Burnell and Florence Little in Abertillery until it was convenient to dispose of their bodies. At least 4 of the Hammersmith victims were stored before being dumped at various London locations.(7) All Hammersmith victims were demure and childlike in stature.(8) Harold Jones had an oral fixation at the time of the Abertillery child murders. It is recorded by his then 13 year-old girlfriend Selina Mortimer that Jones had asked her to spit in his mouth. The Hammersmith killer also had an oral fixation by removing the teeth or dentures of his victims.(9) At least 4 of the Hammersmith victims had been stored (in an electricity sub-station on the Heron Trading Estate Acton) before being dumped at various London locations. Jones' daughter has stated that her father had worked as a sheet metal worker in Acton but wasn't aware of where in Acton. This is something only the police would be able to ascertain.(10) After Harold Jones was jailed for the murder of Florence Little he bragged about his ability to outfox the police during the earlier inquiry into the murder of Freda Burnell. He said: "The arrival of the men from Scotland Yard fascinated me. I had only read of Scotland Yard men before. Now I saw them in the flesh - and I beat them." I am convinced that Harold Jones went to his grave in 1971 knowing that he had beaten them again.I am in contact with adult children of 5 of the 8 Hammersmith murder victims. Learning of the deaths of their mother's has had an incredibly negative impact on them. They all feel cheated that it seems as though the police have no appetite for reviewing the case.I am also in contact with the families of 2 men that have been wrongly named as the killer. (Mungo Ireland and former world light-heavyweight boxer Freddie Mills.) They are also distraught that their fathers' good reputation has not been restored. Freddie Mills' daughter Amanda told me that owing to the stigma regarding her father that she hasn't told her teenage son that his father was a famous world champion boxer.THE SHOW MUST GO ON.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6BnF5FEmvQhttps://www.jarossi.com/the-hunt-for-the-60s-ripper/hunt-for-the-60s-ripper-on-youtube/?fbclid=IwAR0KLDA0Gs8jaaIHQM0MZcbMaZcu1RlMNswmJyiHLZXfp9wP1CwUQZAm_DY

Neil Milkins ● 1226d0 Comments ● 1226d

Planning Application Forms - missing or redacted

On several occasions, neighbours have pointed out the absence of the actual Planning Application Form within the papers filed on the Council's Planning Website.Thus, the identity of the Applicant is uncertain also the Ownership Certificate details are not available, which can be very important where an Applicant incorrectly claims using Ownership Certificate A to be the sole owner of all of the land to which the application relates when, in fact, this is NOT the case.In a recent case in Acton, in Woodhurst Road, a freeholder developer proposed building a structure in part of another long Lessee resident's garden and no Ownership Certificate B was submitted to the Council.  The garden owner did not see any yellow Public Notice outside the property and had not received any separate Notice from the developer as required by law.  The developer's agent having declared in the Application Form submitted to the Council that no one has a Lease of 7 years or more - this, if it were true, would therefore have absolved the Applicant from having to serve an Ownership Certificate B, but in fact, the garden Leasehold owner proved to us and the Council that she possessed a Lease of 142 years!The resident wrote to the Chief Planning Officer, Ms Alex Jackson about this on 19th April 2022 but, as far as I know, she did not receive any response.The Legal Requirement: STATUTORY PLANNING REGISTER - Section 69 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 requires a local planning authority to keep a statutory planning register which includes information about Applications for planning permission and to make it available for public inspection, as per the text below:(1) The local planning authority must keep a register containing such information as is prescribed as to —(a) applications for planning permission;(8) The register must be kept available for inspection by the public at all reasonable hours.........................Article 40 of The Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 also provides that where (as is common) the register is kept in electronic format, then it can be provided to the public on a website – article 40(14).As Acton resident, Gerald Moran (with almost 50 years experience in property law) has pointed out, there does not appear to be any authority for redacting the Application Form mentioning that "on the contrary, the Data Protection Act 2018 at Schedule 11 paragraph 3(1) exempts from the listed provisions (in chapters 2 and 3 of Part 4 of that Act) Statutory Registers kept for public inspection".

Victor Mishiku ● 1258d6 Comments ● 1252d

Voting UKIP in Ealing Common and Greenford Broadway

Our focus in Ealing offers the following policies:• UKIP will provide local council offices in each ward so that residents can meet council officials face-to-face when they need to, which has not been possible since the closure of Perceval House and the possible redevelopment of Ealing Town Hall. We will also upgrade the Council's telephone system to make it more user-friendly,• We will abolish fat-cat pay by introducing a recruitment protocol for senior council positions we call Cheapest Competent Candidate. This requires recruiters to put at least five names on their shortlists and then ask the candidates to bid for the job, thereby creating an open competitive market, appointing the lowest.  Further increases will be kept in line with the average for all staff,• We will rip up all speed bumps, cycle lanes and other traffic restrictions to reduce pollution and frustration as well as increase local economic efficiency,• We will provide free off-street parking for borough residents throughout the borough,• We will support housing associations to provide new affordable housing using cheap loans from the City which we can guarantee,• We will set up a Landlords' Guarantees Agency to offer landlords direct on-time payment of their rent in return for an insurance premium deduction. The Agency will then collect the rent from the tenant using all the powers of the council. Likewise tenants can hold landlords to account through the Agency to ensure that maintenance and other obligations are properly met.• We will work with the DWP to review Universal Credits to iron out delays,• We will work with the DWP to introduce pre-vetting for benefits so that those who need them can receive them immediately on claiming. In particular this will benefit the self-employed who currently have to reclaim from scratch for every gap between contracts.

Julie Carter ● 1303d10 Comments ● 1300d

Divisive, and a form of social exclusion. Another Labour Triumph

... that has gone completely unchallenged by any opposition.  Which just underlines the pitiful state of this country' inept and morally corrupt methods of management.Shaping Ealing.Another leaflet. Bereft of information and contact points.This is clearly open to only those who have an up to date smartphone.It is only open online to those who willingly accept ALL cookies.Read the terms.  These way beyond most online cookie intrusions.There is no offline form of participation.The claim on the flyer is completely contradictory. " We're encouraging ALL residents, businesses and others to get involved"Who, exactly are others?  Lobby groups? Property developers? PR companies, Activist groups all pre briefed on what to input?This needs to be clarified.Just how many council tax paying residents who are not online or in possession of the latest technology are excluded?It's already known that a very significant proportion of residents in most demographic groups are not fully internet and online savvy or have safe access.Cover restrictions revealed to volunteers just how widespread this is. Not that that made any impact with this council who have not really listened at all to any non council volunteer groups except the ones they fund. Who dare not criticise for obvious reasons.How can a local authority that is supposed to uphold democracy and equality engage a survey company that wants complete control and access without choice?Not even Government or security establishments do that.So who exactly is responsible for this and why is their name not anywhere to be found?It is shameful.  Just another form of discrimination and deception.Worst of all is why any respectable opposition party is not asking this and highlighting this abuse and debacle in election campaigns?That is equally shameful.

Raymond Havelock ● 1311d17 Comments ● 1306d

Give my View. Ts&Cs of an undemocratic nature.

This organisation want it all.  There is no simple option to opt out of anything and the terms to do so are ridiculous.How on earth can a Local authority engage such a dodgy organisation?  Undermines completely the credibility of 'listening'pated to save others the trouble.I wonder of Cllr Manro has a comment to make?  Or any councillors of any party come to that?Give My ViewContact usPrivacy policyThis privacy policy contains important information about who we are, and how and why we collect personal information from you. It explains what personal information we collect about you via the Give My View platform (givemyview.com) (the "Site"), why we collect it, how we use it and your rights in relation to it.When we refer to personal information, we mean any information which could directly identify you (such as, your name or e-mail address) as well as information which could indirectly identify you. Information which could indirectly identify you means information which could identify you when combined with other information we hold about you.When we refer to "us", "we" or "our", we mean Built-ID Limited, a company registered in England and Wales (registration number 10311228), and with registered address of Minerva House, Lower Bristol Road, Bath BA2 9ER. Our correspondence address is: Hurst View, Jacobs Well, Surrey, GU4 7QS.Please read this privacy policy carefully. If you have any questions, comments or concerns about any aspect of this policy, please contact us at info@givemyview.com or call +44 (0) 7547 780 640.1. WHAT BASIS DO WE HAVE FOR PROCESSING YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION?We will only process personal information where we have a lawful reason for doing so. The lawful basis for processing personal information by us will be one of the following as set out in section 2 below:the processing is necessary for the pursuit of our legitimate business interests (including that of the delivery and the promotion of our Site or services) so long as this is not overridden by your own rights and interests; orprocessing is necessary for compliance with a legal obligation; orwhere you have given your consent to the processing.2. WHAT PERSONAL INFORMATION DO WE COLLECT AND PROCESS?We collect personal information from you when you access our Site, participate in Give My View polls and surveys or if you contact us. We either collect this personal information from you directly (such as when you participate in a poll or answer a free-text question on our Site) or indirectly (such as your browsing activity on our Site).This section sets out the different ways in which we collect and use personal data from you.2.1. Information we automatically collectCollection:We collect certain information relating to all visitors to our Site (whether they choose to participate in a poll or not). Indirect personal information consists of:information about the device you used to access the Site, such as the internal protocol (IP) address of the device, the browser software, operating system, date and time of access; andinformation on how you use our Site (for example, what pages you looked at).Use:We use the personal information we collect when you visit the Site to:Use: enable you to use the Site (and all of its features);Analytics: analyse how our Site is being used, so that we can constantly improve it; andStatistical purposes: collate anonymous, aggregate statistics on the performance of parts of our Site or member profiles (for example, the number of people answering a poll over a defined period of time).Our reason for using your data in this way:Legitimate interests (for essential cookies): where our use of your personal information is necessary for our legitimate interests or the legitimate interests of a third party (unless there is a good reason to protect your personal information which overrides our legitimate interests).Consent (for non-essential cookies): we collect and use your personal information in this way where you have given us clear consent to do so. Please see our Cookies policy below for more information about how we use Cookies.2.2. When you participate in a Poll on our SiteCollection:We run are a digital consulting business that engages with individuals to collate information and opinions about particular projects, through targeted campaigns. You are able to give you views on projects that relate to, or may affect, you through our Site.When you participate in a poll or survey through our Site, we may ask you for personal information (such as your name, email address and/or postcode) depending on the nature of the project or campaign. We may also ask you other questions that relate specifically to the poll that you participating in. For some polls, you may be able to submit answers without providing your contact information but for others we will require you to enter your contact information if you wish to participate. You will have control and oversight of the personal information that you choose to submit to us at the point you are submitting your responses.The information you provide as part of the Give My View polls and surveys will be shared with our clients. Our clients are organisations that have engaged us to create the poll or survey, and collate and/or analyse the results. Such organisations may include property developers, local councils and other organisations looking to gain insight into public opinion on a project or campaign ("Clients").As part of the services we provide to our Clients, we may also be required to share your personal information their communications agencies. For more information on how we share your personal data, please see the "How will we share your personal data?" at section 3 below.Please note that you can still vote anonymously by choosing not to provide this information, but it is only by creating a profile and providing your name and email address that you can donate points earned by voting to a local charity.If you choose to sign up via Google or another third party network, we will collect certain additional personal information from you (such as an overview of your profile with that third party). If you choose to use a third party to sign up, please consult the relevant third party’s privacy policy for information on how they use and share your data.In some instances, our Clients may request additional information from you as part of their project. Such information is collected in accordance with their own privacy policy.Use:We use the personal information we collect from you when you participate in a poll or survey as follows:Access: to give you access to information about the project relating to the poll;Submit responses: to allow you to participate in the poll by responding to our questions or requests;Communication: to communicate with you about the poll or project or send you information about us or our services that we believe may be of interest to you; andAnalytics: perform analytics (such as trends, sales intelligence, marketing effectiveness uptake and progress) to improve our Site or services;Provide services to our Clients: we will pass your information and poll or survey results to our Clients and other third parties as part of the services we provide to them.We may use your contact information to send you relevant updates by email, text message or phone that we may circulate from time to time, news about events we are organising or participating in, and/or other information about us and the services that we believe may be of interest to you. You can specify your contact preferences by using the options provided on our emails or by emailing info@givemyview.com. We have a legitimate interest in processing your personal information for promotional purposes, which means we do not need your consent to send you promotional communications related to your account. However, where consent is needed, we will ask you for this separately and clearly.We like to keep you posted on everything you need to know about our Site. We usually do this by e-mail. You can choose to stop receiving communications from us at any time by unsubscribing from our e-mails, or by contacting us on info@givemyview.com or +44 (0) 7547 780 640. We may ask you to confirm your marketing preferences if you instruct us to provide further services in the future or if we’re required to do so by law or a restructure of our business.Our reason for using your data in this way:Legitimate interests: where our use of your personal information is necessary for our legitimate interests or the legitimate interests of a third party (unless there is a good reason to protect your personal information which overrides our legitimate interests).2.3. Other uses for your personal informationWe may also use personal information to:assist us in any disputes, claims or investigations; andcomply with our own legal obligations.We will only use your personal information for those purposes where it is necessary to do so, and (in any case) our use of your personal information will continue to be governed by this privacy policy (as well as certain laws and regulations which govern our use of your personal information).2.4. ChildrenOur services are not designed for, or intentionally targeted at, children under the age of 16 year old. We do not intentionally collect or maintain data about anyone under the age of 16.3. HOW WILL WE SHARE YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION?3.1. Sharing your personal data with our ClientsThe Site allows you as an individual to participate in and give your opinions about particular projects, through targeted campaigns. You are able to give you views on projects that relate to, or may affect, you through our Site.When we collect your personal data through polls or surveys, we will share this information with our Clients and their communications agencies as part of the services we provide to them. We may analyse and aggregate the information before sharing this with our Clients and their communications agencies and our Clients may also analyse your information to help shape their project.Our Clients or their communications agency may contact you to invite you to events or exhibitions relating to the project or to ask you for further information relating to the poll (e.g. further details about your opinions or they may ask you to provide a letter of support or otherwise, as determined by them).Our Client engaging the poll will be specified on the Site and linked to the relevant poll. For a list of the Clients we have worked with and may share your personal information with, please contact us at info@built-id.com3.2. Sharing your personal data with our suppliersWe use third party data processors who provide services to us to enable us to run our Site and operate our business. Such third parties cannot do anything with your personal information unless we have instructed them to do so.We may share your personal data with third parties who provide IT services and cloud hosting solutions, such as: Amazon Web Services (cloud services), including (but not limited to) Lambda, CloudFront;Heroku (cloud services); Papertrail (log management); Mandrill (email services); and Mailchimp (marketing automation and email service).3.3. Sharing your personal data with other third partiesWe may also share your personal information with other third parties, including:Communication agencies: in connection with the management of an event, in which case the details will only be used by the third party for that specific purpose;Professional advisors: to enable us to provide our services to you, we may need to share your personal information with our business partners (including professional advisers such as accountants or auditors), external service providers (for support services including accounting, events management, data entry) and/or overseas counsel;Social media sites: third parties approved by you, e.g. social media sites (such as Facebook) where we’ve obtained your consent to share your data in this way; orLegal and regulatory compliance: disclosures required by law or regulation.If a third party is considering whether to invest in our business, or to acquire all (or any part of) of our business and/or assets, we may need to share your personal information with that third party. We will only do so to the extent that it is necessary, and (in any case) our use of your personal information will continue to be governed by this privacy policy (as well as certain laws and regulations which govern our use of your personal information).Some of those third party recipients may be based outside the European Economic Area — for further information including on how we safeguard your personal data when this occurs, see ‘"International Transfers".4. THIRD PARTY WEBSITES AND APPLICATIONSOur Site contains links to other websites and applications which are operated by third parties. These other third party websites may also gather information about you in accordance with their own privacy policies, which are entirely separate. This privacy policy applies only to the personal information that we collect through our Site. For privacy information relating to these other third party websites, please visit their respective privacy policies as applicable.5. INTERNATIONAL TRANSFERSFrom time to time, we may need to transfer your personal information to our business partners, who are located in territories outside of the European Economic Area ("EEA"), including in the USA, in order to provide you with the services required.Such countries do not have the same data protection laws as the UK and EEA. We will, however, ensure the transfer complies with data protection law and all personal information will transferred securely. Our standard practice is to use standard data protection contract clauses that have been approved by the European Commission or, for transfers to the USA, Privacy Shield (as applicable).6. RETENTIONYour personal information is retained by us for only as long as it is necessary for the purposes set out above. We will keep your personal information for as long as required in order to:deliver our services to our Client;respond to any queries, complaints or claims made by you or on your behalf;resolve disputes;to fulfil our legal obligations or meet regulatory requirements.In general, we will retain your information for 12 months after the completion of a project you provided your view on, to allow the relevant third party to analyse project feedback and make improvements to the project.If you wish to delete your personal data from the Site prior to the end of this retention period, you may do so at any point by contacting us at info@givemyview.com.7. YOUR RIGHTS IN RELATION TO YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATIONUnder data protection laws, you have the right to:Access The right to be provided with a copy of your personal information (the right of access)Rectification The right to require us to correct any mistakes in your personal informationTo be forgotten The right to require us to delete your personal information—in certain situationsRestriction of processing The right to require us to restrict processing of your personal information—in certain circumstances, e.g. if you contest the accuracy of the dataData portability The right to receive the personal information you provided to us, in a structured, commonly used and machine-readable format and/or transmit that data to a third party—in certain situationsTo object The right to object:at any time to your personal information being processed for direct marketing (including profiling)in certain other situations to our continued processing of your personal information, e.g. processing carried out for the purpose of our legitimate interests.Not to be subject to automated individual decision making The right not to be subject to a decision based solely on automated processing (including profiling) that produces legal effects concerning you or similarly significantly affects youFor further information on each of those rights, including the circumstances in which they apply, please contact us or see the Guidance from the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) on individuals’ rights under the General Data Protection Regulation, which is available at: https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/individual-rights/.If you would like to exercise any of those rights, please:contact us at info@givemyview.com or +44 (0) 7547 780 640;let us have enough information to identify you;let us have proof of your identity; andlet us know what right you want to exercise and the information to which your request relates.8. SECURITYWe use a variety of security measures, including encryption and authentication tools, to maintain the safety and security of your personal information. Your personal information is protected behind secured networks and is only accessible by a limited number of people who have special access rights to such systems and who have a genuine business need to access it. Those processing your personal information will do so only in an authorised manner and are subject to a duty of confidentiality.We also have procedures in place to deal with any suspected data security breach. We will notify you and any applicable regulator of a suspected data security breach where we are legally required to do so.If you want detailed information from Get Safe Online on how to protect your information and your computers and devices against fraud, identity theft, viruses and many other online problems, please visit https://www.getsafeonline.org/. Get Safe Online is supported by HM Government and leading businesses.9. COOKIES9.1. What are Cookies?A cookie is a small file which is placed on your device when you use our Site . Cookies contain information that is transferred to your computer's hard drive (or the hard drive of another relevant device).We use cookies to distinguish you from other users on our website, to tailor your experience to your preferences, and to help us improve the Site.Some of the cookies we use are essential for the Site to operate. If you use your browser settings to block all cookies (including essential cookies), you may not be able to access all or parts of our Site.You can manage any non-essential cookies by clicking on our cookie pop-up. By default, most internet browsers accept cookies, but you can choose to enable or disable some or all cookies via the settings on your internet browser. Most internet browsers also enable you to choose whether you wish to disable all cookies or only third party cookies. For further details, please consult the help menu in your internet browser.You can withdraw your consent for use of non-essential cookies or manage any other cookie preferences by clicking on Manage cookies at the bottom of any page on our Site. It may be necessary to refresh the page for the updated settings to take effect.9.2. What Cookies do we use?We use the following cookies:Strictly necessary cookies. These cookies are required to save your session and to carry out activities that are strictly necessary for the operation of the Site. These cookies are session cookies, which means they’re temporary and will expire when you close your browser.Functionality cookies. These cookies are used to recognise you when you return to the Site. They enable us to personalise our content for you, greet you by name and remember your preferences.Third Party cookies. We use third party cookies on the Site to perform other functions such as analytics and advertising (as set out below).You have the right to opt out of third-party cookies by removing your consent through our Site.Cookie Name Purpose Essential or Non-EssentialBID-Authorization Application session cookie Allows your to securely access the Site, including the polls, and submit responses. This is an essential cookie so we are not required to request your consent before placing this cookie.Google Analytics _ga, _gid This cookie collects the following information: traffic source, page visits and duration, repeat visitors, browser type and version, browser language, operating system, device type, service provider and screen resolution (if on mobile). If you are logged into a Google account, Google Analytics also provides us with your age range, gender and interests. Non-essential third party cookie. We will therefore request your consent before placing this cookie.Facebook Tracking _fr, _fbp This is an advertising cookie used to deliver advertising content through Facebook. Non-essential third party cookie. We will therefore request your consent before placing this cookie.9.3 Third party access to CookiesThe cookies we use will only be accessed by us and those third parties named in the table above for the purposes referred to in this cookie policy. Those cookies will not be accessed by any other third party.If you 'share' content from our Site through social media websites (such as Facebook, Google and Twitter), you may be sent cookies from these third-party websites. We don't control the setting of these cookies, and we recommend you check the third-party websites for more information about their cookies and how to manage them.9.4 How to turn off CookiesIf you do not want to accept any cookies, you may be able to change your browser settings so that cookies (including those which are essential to the services requested) are not accepted. If you do this, please be aware that you may lose some of the functionality of our Site.For further information about cookies and how to disable them, please go to the guidance on cookies published by the UK Information Commissioner’s Office available at: www.aboutcookies.org or www.allaboutcookies.org.10. UPDATES TO THIS PRIVACY POLICYThis privacy policy was last updated in March 2020. We keep our privacy notice under regular review to make sure it is up to date and accurate. If we change our privacy policy from time to time, we will post the details of any changes here. We may also take reasonable steps to notify you if such changes affect how your personal data is processed.

Raymond Havelock ● 1306d0 Comments ● 1306d

TfL still manipulating and lying

If TfL were a national government, it would be up there with Russia, China and many despot countries for their constant misleading and use of unsubstantiated propaganda.It may not be as nasty as those places but the methodology remains the same. It would no doubt be unrecognised by the UK and sanctions applied.Then again. our Government is not exactly squeaky clean when it comes to telling the truth or misleading the public.However, it takes constant Freedom of Information requests to glean anything from TfL and their duck and dive approach to responding usually means 2 or three attempts before the answers start to emerge.They know that journalists and those who take the trouble to investigate further have limited time or resources or both and this appeases them.The latest claims on this websites lead story are completely unsubstantiated and based on policy and politically funded research. In other words organisations that will produce a report that vindicates what their paymasters policy requires.To take one example : To date there are no clear and definitive causes of Dementia. Whilst Alzheimers is now the generic word, Dementia is a range of diseases of which Alzheimers is one.It is as common in rural areas as it is in dense urban areas - as is Asthma. I have family who suffer both and live in a very rural part of England and one in Eire. Fact is, after decades of research,fund raising the causes are still not understood. It is so random in so many cases.TfLs claims about Hospital admissions are also unfounded. it is modelled propaganda. They have omitted the sources again and again.  B*******t baffles Brains and it seems it works.Our politicians are too lazy or afraid to do the hard work of proper fact finding and force TfL to be open and honest rather than sly and deceptive.The huge waste of money on the ULEZ which with diminishing non compliant vehicles already way below the figure TfL based the justification on in the first place - again by not even being honest to themselves but keen to please their political masters, could have made safer road surfaces and better general improvements London wide for all road users and provide a fully funded mandatory training and proficiency scheme to be reinstated for Cyclists and other non car users.It was the LCC that set this up in the first place and it ended with the demise of the GLC.

Raymond Havelock ● 1408d124 Comments ● 1367d

Complaints procedure rewritten to protect the CEO.

Complaints procedure rewritten to protect the CEO.The complaints procedure used to have 3 stages.  It has been reduced to 2.  It will no longer have a stage-three input from the CEO.  Instead, it will go straight to the local Government Ombudsman.  Nice for the CEO.  If the LGO finds the Council guilty of maladministration, the CEO will no longer be implicated.The CEO should be held accountable for anything and everything those under him do.  He is paid enough to take responsibility for their behaviour.   The change was discussed at the cabinet meeting of 10.11.21.  The rationale for trimming away the third stage was that it was found that the stage-three review did not change the outcome for the complainant. The same might be said of stage two, because the officers who review the response of the stage-one respondent (their colleague) act not with the honesty and impartiality required of a public servant but as “counsel for the defence” for their colleague.   The usual trick, even at stage one, is to claim the matter has already been dealt with. At the cabinet meeting, there was no discussion of whether the CEO should not still play a part in the process by being the second-stage respondent. So, now the CEO has no responsibility to investigate the behaviour of the senior officers below him, which one would have thought was one of his functions. The author of the proposal put before the Cabinet for this change was Alison Reynolds,who has control of the complaints procedure.  This is the Alison Reynolds who when asked to investigate a complaint against a senior colleague wrote “I have concluded that all of the matters raised as part of this case have now been addressed”  - even though she was the first person to address them  - and handn’t addressed them and didn’t! The complaints procedure is corrupted by senior officers who protect their senior colleagues by this quick-fix comment (“already dealt with”).  It has become institutionalised by repetition.

Andrew Farmer ● 1379d1 Comments ● 1378d

council fined by LGO for housing and compaints maladministration

Council found guilty of “severe maladministration” in respect of housing and its complaints procedure. No news to me and my neighbours.  We recall the horrors of the time the Council was operating a hostel at 354-6 Uxbridge Road - contrary to planning regulations.  More recently council officer Mark Wiltshire relicensed a landlord as “a fit and proper person” to hold a licence on a large HMO when he knew he had been housing tenants in filth and fire hazard (walls damp and mouldy, smoke alarm taped over, fire escape route blocked with old furniture and rubbish), and knew he was failing to prevent his tenants causing antisocial nuisance in the neighbourhood.   Shocking.  More shocking:  Wiltshire still has his job.  The complaints procedure?  We complained about him. It was dealt with by Helen Harris, Director legal and Democratic Services.  Required to respond within twenty days, she procrastinated for nearly five months!  The Council apologised for her “unacceptable” behaviour.  The complaint passed to officer Alison Reynolds. Before we had had a chance to request escalation, she had already refused to escalate the complaint. “I would like to advise you that the Council will no longer enter into any more correspondence with you or your associates”.  It was our right to request escalation. She corrupted due process, Shocking.  More shocking. She still has her job. History has repeated itself and will go on doing so under Mason.  He asked residents to email him with concerns about the borough.  I emailed him about this.  He ignored the email.  

Andrew Farmer ● 1393d1 Comments ● 1387d

Public Open Space Covenants & Stipulations on Council-held land

In the neighbouring London Borough of Hillingdon (our Prime Minister - The Right Hon. Boris Johnson's constituency), the Leader of the Labour Group of Councillors made the following Motion at Cabinet on 13th January 2022."That this Council believes that restrictive covenants on public & communal land plays an important role in ensuring that the value and enjoyment of the land is, and continues to be, preserved. Restrictive covenants enhance and protect our borough for our residents’ benefit and that of future generations.This Council, therefore, believes that it should set the example and do all within its power to uphold restrictive covenants especially on council land.This Council, therefore, calls on the Cabinet to abolish their current plans to remove the restrictive covenant in Yiewsley in order to develop on the recreation ground and library site.This Council calls on the Cabinet to enter into dialogue with local residents to devise alternative options for the use of the land in Yiewsley that complies with the restrictive covenants put in place to preserve the enjoyment and benefit for Hillingdon residents.Furthermore, this Council commits to uphold restrictive covenants across the borough for the benefit of residents."The above declaration in the Motion is reminiscent of the admirable Manifesto Pledge made by Cllr. John Cudmore, former Acton Councillor and the Leader of the Labour Group in Ealing at the time of his party's successful efforts to win the administration control of Ealing Council in May 1994 at the local 4-yearly election promising that the Council would respect the views of residents and protect the borough's conservation areas and green spaces from backland developments, etc.Victor Mishiku  16/1/2022"The Covenant Movement" Ealing.

Victor Mishiku ● 1390d2 Comments ● 1387d

The continuing tragedy of Gunnersbury Park

Neglected by two boroughs who could not manage to tie a shoe-lace together for decades, handed over in an appallingly formulated way to a Cop-out CIC, then packed out with Cronies of like mindsets and connections, a TfL approach to funding where even a tuft of grass is fiscally overpricedSome good stuff, but from a a lot of grant funding which is unaccounted for and overseen with sort of knowledge that would make an IKEA shelf priced at £2500 plus fitting seem "very reasonable". Much core infrastructure for a public park remains as poor as it has been for 25 plus years. A complete contradiction to 'Community Interest Company " and with not even a freedom of information clause - which needless to say this management wriggled out of. Because it's overseers, both Trustees and Councils, deemed it irrelevant.Even a Velcro shoe strap is too challenging for this CIOC who only know how to bully and manipulate with help from their 'friends'Loss of cheap affordable to all public park amenities and replaced by exclusivity with a patronising faux front of inclusivity.Change is welcome, but that will only be change for the better if ALL the existing league of cronies and those at the trough are not involved in any form.  A completely new broom of more open and honest management put in place properly answerable to the local people of Ealing, Acton and Brentford who seem to be considered as irrelevant unless they can afford it. Community groups must be on the board and as trustees, not just selected politicians and 'preferred' individuals.Local people, not council officers with close connections, or politicians who seem to have failed with Gunnersbury time and time again, need to be far more in control of a Park that was purchased at a knock down price on the premise that it was for the well being of All the local people of Ealing Acton Brentford and Chiswick.Will this be any better? With how things are carried out in our name?I doubt it. It seems more like another move to making it a pay to enter venue like Syon or Kew and not what it is supposed to be, a Public park owned in trust by two boroughs for it's inhabitants

Raymond Havelock ● 1405d1 Comments ● 1405d

Freedom of Information Refused by Ealing

I have strong reason to feel that the courts are partisan and are assisting Ealing Council in getting their way in court cases . ( at least with pricate individuals ) so i asked Ealing if they could provide me with some simple data FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000 - INFORMATION REQUESTThank you for your Freedom of Information request received by the Council on 13th December 2021.Your request:• What percentage of court cases Ealing win and lose and where these court cases areheld?• The names of the deputy district judges and judges who hear your cases• I would also like to know how many court cases you instigate and how many courtcases are instigated against you.Your request has been assessed and the following information is provided in response:This information is not recorded. It would take longer than 18 hours to answer this request, due to theneed to peruse hundreds of files from many different council departments. Note that it is not just thelegal team that deal with legal proceedings brought against the council; many departments (eg.Insurance, housing, planning) deal with many cases independently. Some non-legal teams also onoccasion bring proceedings on behalf of the council.the reason for my request was to see if Ealing was given special treatment and if certain judges were given the cases related to the borough it seems a reasonable FOI request to me because my own experience suggests networking between Ealing Council and the judges who fail to act with impartiality and have ethnic and political links with the Councils senior leadership

P Taylor ● 1415d11 Comments ● 1407d

Is this ok?

I recently had a remote hearing at Brentford County court , Ealing Council won £1600 based upon their claim taht there is no law that requires the council to respond to a local resident . this means that according to the judge absolutely NOBODY has any actual right to a response regardles sof the topic . i regard this as a denial of basic justice . after the hearing I went online and discovered that the Judge Michael Shelton was a co religionist of the Councils lawyer and indeed the leader of Ealing Council . I am no legal expert but where there are significant political and religious links I would have thought it would be prudent to avoid any possibility of favouritism. I had emailed the editor of Ealing today but got no reply . Ealing Council have all kinds of stated policies on treating residents with respect that they violate , the new leader Peter Mason ( he probably is) claimed that his administration would be open and transparent and that is absolutely not the case . The council have an exprert legal team and very warm relations with Brentford Court , i have submitted a FOI request to ask what percentage of Ealings court cases are won and lost . in my opinion the small claims court should be a simple straightforward method for average people to get justice but in reality it is a minefield of corruption, legalese, jargon , how the hell can I who brought the case because i have been IGNORED for 6 years be given costs to the wealthy council of £1600 in the SMALL CLAIMS COURT based upon the idea that no law is actually some sort of law and using obscure civil procedure rules . so far a couple of people have been helpful but i am determined not to allow Ealing Council to get away with this and you should help me because the idea that teh council can legally ignore us must be absolutely unacceptable in a so called democracy and that there must be no overt links between the politicians and the judges as was in this case , you are welcome to call me on 07396534522 Paul

P Taylor ● 1419d9 Comments ● 1416d

Sadiq Khan is misusing our money 

Khan is giving £25,000 grants to help people 'decolonise' their street names, part of his million-pound Untold Stories fund, which was “inspired by the BLM protests”. The protests, let us not forget, saw a female police officer injured when one of the defund-the-police activists threw a bottle at her and were inspired by the death of a drug-fuelled armed black burglar who terrorised a woman in her home, yes, good old Georgie Floyd. Renaming a road requires a consultation.   It is a two-sided affair.  Why is Khan, in fairness, not funding those who oppose the renaming?  His obligation is to represent not only people who voted for him but all residents of London.  This is a politically biased and when its detail is examined a racially-discriminatory handout that favours the interest of one section of the community. It was redundant as far as Ealing is concerned.  As soon as Khan first introduced this scheme, Julian Bell was up at dawn, tongue in Khan’s anus, suggesting a specific road-name change, Havelock Road in Southall.  No one there had requested or paid for the change, but the council had heard that people wanted it and so adopted the proposal. The protocol applicable at the time did not permit the name-change so the Council changed it allow it to go ahead. This dishonest stratagem was endorsed by the Cabinet.  Of course. Back to Khan.  This is the man who referred to the “passing” of Sir David Amess as if he died peacefully in his sleep. Nick Price of the Crown Prosecution Service has stated: "We will submit to the court that this murder has a terrorist connection, namely that it had both religious and ideological motivations.”  Which religion would that be?  Is there something embarrassing to Khan in what happened so that he disrespectfully to the memory of David Amess tries to make light of its the horror?  Khan has embarked upon a scheme to undermine our culture and rewrite our history.  Whatever the merits of that, the question is what does he want to replace it with?  One founded on the culture of his ancestral homeland?   I do not want to live in Pakistan-on-Thames.

Andrew Farmer ● 1468d34 Comments ● 1443d

Action against Ealing Council December 7th

i am attempting to get justice against Ealing Council who for 6 years have been ignoring my on topic emails and calls relating to housing issues , the argument that Ealing give is that there is no law that obliges them to respond, how can a council obtain money from local ratepayers without an obligation to reply . do you agree with Ealing council , please note that I am not attempting to locate a missing cat , my emails are about vital housing issues and negligance by the council that have harmed me personally . This matter has been escalated via the official complaints procedures and I had previously been given esacalation reference numbers none of which resulted in any action , My local councillor Anthony Young who is well past retirement age and has out of date details on his landing page also refused to respond fact is that with the exception of bin emptying, street cleaning and parks which at least down my way are well done . i also note a point made by the excellent Andrew Farmer that the promises of new council leader Peter Mason are just empty rhetoric and hot air . there is no point in pretending to make a fresh start after the atrocious Julian Bell and then simply duplicate his policies . anyway if any of you who have experience with Ealing Council would like to asisst me my contact number is 07396534522 and please can you state publicly if you agree that Ealing Council can legally be allowed to ignore the legitimate correspondence of local residents and ratepayers

P Taylor ● 1457d4 Comments ● 1454d

Ealing Independents announces Southall Candidate to compete against Peter Mason.

I have nothing to do with Ealing Independents, just thought folk would like to be aware:-EALING INDEPENDENTS ANNOUNCES SOUTHALL CANDIDATE TO COMPETE AGAINST CURRENT EALING LABOUR AND COUNCIL LEADER PETER MASON IN THE WARD OF SOUTHALL GREEN FOR THE MAY 2022 EALING COUNCIL ELECTIONSDate: 26/10/2021 10:00From: Ealing Independents PRESS RELEASEEALING INDEPENDENTS ANNOUNCES SOUTHALL CANDIDATE TO COMPETE AGAINST CURRENT EALING LABOUR AND COUNCIL LEADER PETER MASON IN THE WARD OF SOUTHALL GREEN FOR THE MAY 2022 EALING COUNCIL ELECTIONSEaling Independents (www.EalingIndependents.com), the grassroots group founded by Ealing resident Leslie Bunder is delighted to announce the first of its many candidates who will be standing for Ealing Independents in the forthcoming May 2022 Ealing elections.These independent candidates will represent their local community and are the first of many to be standing across all towns of Ealing which include Acton, Ealing, Greenford, Hanwell, Northolt, Perivale, and Southall.(Ealing, London, UK – October 26, 2021) – Ealing Independents (www.EalingIndependents.com), the grassroots group standing up for all Ealing residents, is proud to announce that members of the public who wish to improve the lives of their local communities in towns such as Southall are to stand as candidates in their local wards in the May 2022 Ealing elections.These independent candidates, as councillors, will ensure that all Ealing residents and businesses in its seven towns (Acton, Ealing, Greenford, Hanwell, Northolt, Perivale, Southall) have better services to improve life in Ealing and make it better, safer, cleaner and greener.Unlike the current leader of Ealing Council, Labour's Peter Mason who doesn’t live in the ward he is councillor for and has failed to hold any resident surgeries (including virtual) for over a year despite having a contract to do so, Ealing Independents councillors live and are a part of community the wards they will represent.“I moved to Southall Green fifteen years ago. I live with my wife and two young children, who attend school and nursery in Southall,” says Southall Green resident and candidate for councillor David Marsden.“I’ve worked in Southall for the last six years supporting better neighbourhoods in West London, and Southall in particular.”“I’ve been a leading campaigner in the fight for Clean Air for Southall and Hayes, and I’ve opposed the unsafe development of the highly toxic old Gasworks site at Council meetings and community protests.”Marsden added: “I’ve been an active local Labour party member since 2019. Ordinary Labour party members and a few councillors have always shown solidarity and offered practical help. But we have all been blocked from changing anything for the better by former Ealing Labour Council Leader Julian Bell and his successor Peter Mason, who is also an elected councillor for Southall Green ward. Both are very much on the right wing of the party, and only interested in serving their own interests, not the interests of the people of Southall, whose votes they take for granted.”“Both Bell and Mason accepted over £30,000 in gifts and hospitality from the Gasworks developers, yet refused to openly and transparently declare their financial interests at the public meeting in 2019. Mason, as chair of that meeting, tried to prevent me from speaking to reveal that one of the chemicals being dug up at the Gasworks site, and one of the main causes of the bad smell, is potentially fatal to some people with Asian and African genetic heritage.”“Instead of standing up for residents in his own council ward, Mason took time off to get a Masters degree in Town Planning. Now we are faced with tower blocks going up everywhere, 10,000 new homes, 40,000 new residents and their cars. No wonder they want us all to get on our bikes!”“It’s clear that Mason’s and Labour’s priorities are not in the best interests of Southall residents. It’s time to tell Mason and Labour to get on their bikes, and get out of Southall!”“If elected as an Ealing Independents councillor, I will stand up and make sure that the voices of Southall people are heard in the Council Chamber and elsewhere. I will fight for the rights of Southall people to live, work, learn and play in a cleaner, safer Southall that we can all be proud to call home. I will always be open to listen to people’s problems, concerns, ideas and suggestions in person, by phone, text, email, WhatsApp, Twitter, Facebook and any other means where possible. I will make sure Southall people’s views are represented.”ABOUT EALING INDEPENDENTSSince launching in February 2021 with the sole aim to support all residents and stand up for them, Ealing Independents has focused on ensuring that local people have a party that puts them first.Ealing Independents candidates will give residents something that national political parties do not offer – elected councillors putting the interests of residents ahead of their own self-interest or national party interest.Ealing Independents is committed to ensuring it creates and delivers the borough’s first and only people’s manifesto.This manifesto involves Ealing Independents actively listening to residents and local businesses across the borough and its seven towns to ensure that as a council it follows what the people need – a council that listens to them, helps them, and ensures they are protected.Ealing Independents is the party that loves Ealing, and its councillors will ensure residents are never ignored.All residents in Ealing are invited to submit their thoughts of their priorities for a better Ealing at hello@ealingindependents.com where the party will read every email and listen to the feedback.Among the failures to Ealing residents since 2010, Ealing Labour has:Fought against Southall residents who suffer toxic air from the Southall gasworks development by not taking action against developers and hiding information that advises of the issues causing toxic air.Failed for years to pay Ealing Schools catering staff a Living Wage despite the council claiming to be a Living Wage employer.Poorly engaged with residents instead of creating and ensuring a partnership is developed to improve roads for all users, including cars, bikes and pedestrians in order to unite communities to work together and tackle climate change.Closed youth centres and deprived young people of safe and secure facilities to meet, socialise and develop as citizens.Allowed tower buildings to be approved without listening to local residents and creating architectural and environmental eyesores as well as not helping to provide council homes. These buildings are put up without consideration for the need for services, such as GPs and schools to accommodate residents’ needs.Allowed many of its councillors to ignore residents, not respond to their enquiries and fail to provide meaningful actions to help their wards and those living in it.Poorly maintained public pavements and roads making it difficult for disabled as well as able bodied to get out.Allowed trees to over-grow on pavements along with an increase of refuse on footpaths making them a hazard to walkersClosed recycling refuse centres making it difficult for residents to get to them, and resulting in an increase in fly tipping.For more information on Ealing Independents, email: hello@ealingindependents.com or call 07862 748611.You can also visit our website: www.ealingindependents.comor follow us on Twitter at @ealingindys   - www.Twitter.com/EalingIndysEaling Independentsweb: www.EalingIndependents.comtwitter: www.twitter.com/EalingIndysemail: hello@EalingIndependents.comtel: 07862 748611Ealing Independents is a grassroots group exploring the opportunity for independent candidates to be elected in May 2022 and make Ealing better for all.

Rosco White ● 1471d10 Comments ● 1456d

Transparecy and openess promised by Council Leader Peter Mason, or is it censorship?

Peter Mason, when he become Council Leader, said on Tuesday 18th May 2021 that, "I will lead an open, inclusive and transparent council, that engages local people in the challenges we face" (source: Ealing Today 20/05/2021). Yet I would like to bring to your attention an example of Ealing Council's censorship. When submitting comments/objections to planning applications on the council planning portal, Ealing Council are applying moralistic political censorship, which seems to show them to be wilfully ignorant of past history. On 2nd November 2021, I submitted my objection to Planning Application 215857FUL, the developer's land grab of Friary Place Green. I was the 208th commentator at 11.03pm. On the next day, 3rd November, I looked through the planning portal comments page, and my comments/objections that I submitted had been taken down. This led me to re-submit my comments at 12.39pm, as commentator 222, after someone at W12 0RF. These comments/objections were taken down/censored when I looked at around 1.30pm. All this suggests that the present Ealing Council leadership seem predetermined to approve of this land grab by developer Catalyst/Mount Anvil. My second submission to the Ealing Council planning portal, which is almost identical to my first submission. The only difference is instead of Hitler, I wrote H....r, and instead of Friary Park Estate, I changed the capital "E" into a lower case "e".All this led me to copy my second submission and put it on the ActonW3.com discussion forum under the "Catalyst and Mount Anvil attempt Common Lands Grab through dubious planning application" topic/thread. Below is the text of my first submission to Planning Application 215857FUL. Thanks.  Friary Place Green is Common Land, its derogation cannot be changed without a formal consultation carried out by the Council. A Consultation has not taken place. The Council should be protecting Common Land for the people, and not letting others who do not own it redevelop it for their own profits.  "Salami Slicing Imperialism", that Adolf Hitler practised before World War Two is being applied at local level by the developer, Catalyst and Mount Anvil. "One Man", i.e. the developer is trying to impose his will on the thousands of residents, and objectors, that live in the local area. Why is Ealing Council being feckless towards the "salami slicing" of the peoples' Common Land - Friary Place Green, by greedy avaricious developer.  Please do not let Ealing Council be a malleable Quisling, Chaim Rumkowski or a Vichy Republic lackey collaborator for the avaricious developer. Catalyst and Mount Anvil should have planned for the children's play area and cycle hub on the Friary Park Estate that they are redeveloping into an over dense battery council tax farm. Among other things in this redevelopment, they want to erect a 37 and a 29 storey death trap tower blocks. They should not be allowed to parasite on land that they do not own for their own profit desires. Please protect the peoples' Common Land - Friary Place Green, and the environment in general, and reject planning application 215857FUL.

Anthony Hawran ● 1462d7 Comments ● 1456d

FREE CONFIDENCE COURSE (includes one week self-defence) @REYNOLDS SPORTS CENTRE

A local training academy is offering female residents the chance to participate in their FREE six-week confidence building course (includes one week of self-defence) for free. The course aims to give the participants more independence and learn new techniques.Starting Saturday, 13th November 2021, the course held from 11.00am to 1.00pm and is open to women and girls aged 14 years and older who are looking to learn skills to protect themselves and build confidence.This is the eight occasion Sev Necati Training has offered the courses and based on the feedback received, places will be booked quickly.Read below feedback from participants of last year’s course:“I feel very empowered and strong, really inspired and ready. You will grow, gain independence, grow in strength and be able to help others. I really appreciated the opportunity. I feel very lucky and responsible to help others,” Bethany-Anne said.“I’ve never done a course like this before and wanted to know what it was about. It was brilliant, very fun yet professional. Do it! Every girl and woman should do it,” Virginia said."Reynolds Sports Centre in Acton, West London has hosted several Course’s which also includes self-defence training for women and girls 13 years old upwards. These funded classes in conjunction with the Met Police and MOPAC to name but a few are run by Sev Necati Training. Sev’s classes are professionally run and are expertly delivered and increase confidence in everyone who attends.Reynolds Sports Centre and Everyone Active are proud to host and assist with the running of Sev’s classes in the West London area." General Manager, L.CurtainSev Necati, director, said: “We’re delighted to be running another free course in Ealing. This is a great opportunity for women and girls who want to increase their independence and confidence to take advantage of this offer. The course will provide practical techniques, regardless of their background, age or ability which will include one week in self-defence training and vital knowledge on street safety. At the end of the course participants will feel empowered, more confident and improvement in self-worth.”Sign upThere is one course being offered this time on Saturday from 13th November 2021 to Saturday 18th December 2021.  Held from 11:00am to 1:00pm.Held at Reynolds Sport Centre, Ark Acton Academy, Gunnersbury Lane, W3 8EY. A £10.50 deposit is required to secure a place, which will be returned at the end of the course.For more information and to book your place, email info@sevnecatitraining.comYou must contact Sev on the above e-mail address to book a place and for further information

Sev Necati ● 1471d0 Comments ● 1471d

Restrictive Covenant Breach - Compensation of £224,000 awarded to Ealing neighbours

In March 2018, I was contacted by residents of Elmcroft Close, which is adjacent to 59 Eaton Rise, Ealing W5. This was in connection with a new planning application for a substantial 3-Storey extension to the Victorian house plus a smaller outbuilding in the rear garden. The detached Victorian house at No.59 has a large rear garden which some 28 years ago was subject to several unsuccessful attempts to carry out backland development by the then owner, Mr Richard Millett, on the back of his garden. The Planning Committee refused the application and a subsequent appeal was dismissed by The Planning Inspectorate in Bristol. At that time we were fighting purely on planning grounds. On this occasion in March 2018, I also investigated if there might be a restrictive covenant of any assistance to the Objectors. Eventually after a determined campaign by the Objectors, planning permission was granted by Ealing Council for the new development in February 2020 to convert the property from 2 flats into 7 self-contained flats. The Restrictive Covenant was created in the mid-1960s and stipulated what could be built at the rear of No.59 which included the former boundary wall. Although the wall was replaced by a fence long ago, the covenant limited any new building to that of the original wall-height at that time. Subsequently, this was estimated to be about a metre high. The proposed 3-Storey rear extension would of course be very substantially higher this modest wall and therefore was in clear breach of the Restrictive Covenant. The neighbours raised this issue with the developer and eventually having received planning permission in February last year, the developer subsequently made an Application to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) for a modification of the Restrictive Covenant so as the permit the extension and outbuilding. The original proposal was for 8 flats but this had been replaced by a revised planning application for 7 flats in October 2018. After a Hearing of the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) on 27th & 28th July 2021, the Tribunal Member, Chartered Surveyor Ms Diane Martin MRICS FAAVA, decided to allow the proposed modification of the Restrictive Covenant but ON TERMS. The terms are according to the 28-page Decision of the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) which can be read in full on the Internet is that in order to obtain the proposed Modification, the developer, Mr Emil Moskofian, must pay a total sum of £224,000 to 11 Objectors who reside in the houses at Elmcroft Close (No.1-11) as Compensation. The highest award was of £40,000 to one Objector and the lowest £8,000; five others were awarded £16,000 each and four more were awarded £24,000 each. In past days, the Tribunal might have even turned the application down as the compensation is quite large. This is the third highest award of Compensation in a Middlesex covenant case I know of. In this borough, the highest was £350,000 (flats instead of private dwellinghouses), in Wembley £230,000 for a school building on a playing field where houses are anyway allowed but never built). I note with satisfaction that on page 9 of the Decision, Ms Martin stated with regard to a precedent having been set by their lack of previous objection to height above the boundary of the garden trees, and construction of the first floor balcony, that the objectors originally “were unaware of the covenant until alerted to it by a neighbour in March 2018…“ That neighbour (myself) was able to assist the residents at the start of their battle due to long experience with Restrictive Covenants since our first ever case in December 1986 - March 1991 at 8 Longfield Road Ealing W5 (which took 4 years in the High Court and Lands Tribunal - the longest single covenant case ever fought in Ealing with 6 days in court) preventing a major backland development behind the sequence of gardens of houses in Longfield Road, Castlebar Road and Gordon Road on the “Hanger Hill Estate, Ealing” and the proposed use of the garden of 8 Longfield Road as a Vehicular Access Road after demolition of the red-bricked 1883 dwellinghouse built by James Wills, who lived at 43 Castlebar Road. This lends some weight to the words of a past Tribunal Member that the benefit of a restrictive covenant may be found “like hidden treasure in the hour of need”. Finally, I am glad that I did not take Mr Richard Millett’s advice some 27 years ago when he wrote to me telling me to “go back to Japan and save Tokyo”. Victor Mishiku 29/9/2021 “The Covenant Movement”

Victor Mishiku ● 1498d8 Comments ● 1477d

Backgarden development refused tonight at Committee

I attended the Planning Committee tonight at Ealing Town Hall.  I have been doing so for the last 35 years now.I was interested in the case at 1 Golden Manor W7 which is both in a Conservation Area and faces an adjoining Conservation Area and a small Public Open Space (the "Rose Garden").  In 2017 & 2018, I assisted neighbours fight off a previous worse proposal (which was being recommended for granting by the Planning Department) as on this occasion tonight.Upon arrival, I asked to see the Agenda for the 10 items under discussion.  The Committee Clerk gave me her only copy (and there were 9 members of the public there including former MP, Stephen Pound).  The 1 Golden Manor application was listed as Item 10 on the Agenda but the Agenda I was given only went up to Item 3 (last page 185).On reading the index, I realised that there are supposed to be 264 pages and the ones I wanted to read were pages 219 - 264 but they were all missing!    I was able to read the "Briefing Notes" which were placed on the public seats right at the end of the Victoria Hall (away from the loudspeaker) and straight away I noticed a fatal error in them where the Planning Department had come to the bizarre conclusion that the garden at 1 Golden Manor was "previously-developed" land - in fact it is "Greenfield" as residential gardens in built-up areas are now designated as "Greenfield" since 9th June 2010 when the law was changed to protect green open spaces.  This is not the first time a senior planner has made this mistake (uncorrected by her Area Manager, Ms Alex Jackson - as occurred in another case in W13 as Cllr. Mahmood may recall).After the Objectors' representative addressed the Committee very fully and after they then heard from the developer party, the Members of the Planning Committee discussed the application which Ward Councillor Ray Wall (Chair of the Planning Committee) had called in.I was very impressed by the comments of many of the Committee Members who were not afraid to question the recommendation of the Case Officer who was wholly in favour of the development.A number of the Members expressed concern about the inadequate plot size of the proposed development, the loss of garden land especially when "climate change" is much to the fore these days, actual harm to the Conservation Area and the fact that the proposed development would be out of keeping with the character of the Conservation Area and its original carefully laid-out housing and spacious gardens.The acting Chair, Cllr. Tariq Mahmood, called for a vote and the result was 8 - 3 to REFUSE the planning application.Well done to the residents who stood up to the garden-grabbers!Victor Mishiku  Wednesday 21/7/2021"The Covenant Movement"  vmfree@madasafish.com

Victor Mishiku ● 1568d8 Comments ● 1480d

LTNs gone - but a more fundamental issue.....

The LTNs may (mostly) be gone but like other British politicians in history many Ealing councillors failed to understand the political climate of the day. After over 16 months of restrictions the last thing people wanted was more control and more restrictions - they want their freedoms and their normal way of life back. But whether or not you believed that Low Traffic Neighbourhoods were a good or a bad idea, and notwithstanding any policy from central Government or finance from TfL, whether it’s the LTN fiasco or other issues such as high rise towers or Victoria Hall  the whole saga is symptomatic of a more fundamental issue. That is:  the abuse of position and the erosion of democracy.  With their dogma and their own political agenda they become arrogant, don’t listen, think they know better than the people, and that residents should subscribe to their world view. Driven more by party political agenda than respect for the wishes of the local community, they have lost touch with the residents they are supposed to represent. Ill-thought-out policies alienate local residents, creating an anger and resentment which in itself does not promote a healthy and harmonious community. There are a few very good councillors, but generally our party political system does not produce competent individuals suitable for running a local community for the benefit of its residents. As the respected linguist, historian and political activist Noam Chomsky observed, there are always those prepared to reduce our democracy in order to further their agenda. The same people are still in council and there remains an existential threat to our communities and our democracy. But whatever your political persuasion, residents should remain vigilant else there is the risk of more of a ‘Culture of Control’ and an increasingly authoritarian administration. Local communities do not need party agenda driven politicians. Local communities do need honest and trustworthy people as councillors, who are competent, without party-political ideology, and who listen to the local residents who elect them to office to represent their majority wishes. Certain councillors may not like it, but it’s called democracy. Councillors are our local public servants, not our masters - they are not in power, they are in office at our sufferance. They might do well to remember this. 

Mike Davidson ● 1492d85 Comments ● 1483d

Croydon: Borough’s voters choose directly-elected Mayor system in referendum

Support for a change in the governance arrangement was overwhelming (by DAVE HILL)Croydon Council will be led by a directly-elected Mayor (DEM) in future after voters expressed a strong preference for switching to the mayoral system at a local referendum held yesterday.Of the 58,897 people who cast votes, an overwhelming 47,165 chose to adopt a mayoral model, while only 11,519 opted to retain the current leader-and-cabinet set-up, under which the council leader is elected by fellow councillors rather than by voters. Turnout was 21 per cent.The referendum was held after a petition raised by pro-DEM campaigners last year secured enough signatures of borough electors, five per cent of them, to require the plebiscite to take place.The leader of the Labour-run council at the time, Tony Newman, was opposed to switching to the mayoral system. However, following Newman’s departure a year ago amid severe financial problems at the borough, his successor, Hamida Ali, took a more conciliatory approach.Hackney, Lewisham, Newham and Tower Hamlets have had directly-elected Mayors since early this century, and governance referendums held in the latter two boroughs in May saw local electors vote strongly in favour of retaining them.The workings of the mayoral system can vary, however, with power concentrated in the hands of a Mayor or devolved to councillors in different ways and to differing degrees. Croydon Council says its Mayor will appoint a cabinet and delegate powers to it “so that decisions are made collectively, as at present under the leader/cabinet model.”Both the mayoral and the leader-and-cabinet arrangements are termed executive models of governance, with most decision-making powers held at cabinet level.Labour in Croydon has been divided over the governance question, with local MPs Steve Reed and Sarah Jones opposed to adopting the mayoral system while key activists in the south of the borough have favoured it, along with Croydon South Conservative MP Chris Philp.The referendum petition was supported by a political coalition embracing Labour, a former UKIP candidate and residents’ groups unhappy with the “growth borough” policies of the council under Newman, particularly its enthusiasm for more house-building in a borough that has experienced a rapid population increase.Advocates argued that candidates seeking to become Mayor will have an interest in seeking support across the whole of the borough and tailoring policies accordingly, rather than concentrating their efforts on electoral wards they know they can win. Criticisms of the pro-DEM campaign have included claims that it is motivated by a desire to prevent more homes being built in affluent areas.SOURCE: https://www.onlondon.co.uk/croydon-boroughs-voters-choose-directly-elected-mayor-system-in-referendum/?utm_campaign=12721421_Key%20Issues%2013%20Oct%202021&utm_medium=email&utm_source=London%20Councils&dm_i=192K,7KNWT,M4M0DR,UU03B,1

Rosco White ● 1485d5 Comments ● 1484d

Failure to Display Public Notice on Planning Application

Ever since Ealing Planning Department stopped sending out Notification Letters giving 21 days in which to respond to planning applications nearby, the system of putting up the yellow Public Notices on lampposts has been less than perfect.Disregarding instances where developers have likely pulled them down, the Planning Department itself has not always acted sensibly to ensure that affected neighbours know what it being proposed at close proximity.In a case in Rotherwick Hill (part of the Haymills Estate in Ealing W5), an unneighbourly play tower & platform was erected without planning permission.  Eventually, planning applications were made but the Council did not put up any Notices in the road where the adjoining back garden of an Ashbourne Close neighbour would be badly affected and where the neighbour had previously complained about the unauthorised structure overlooking their garden.Because no yellow Public Notice was put up in Ashbourne Close, the most affected neighbour was unaware of the latest application and therefore did not write in within the usual 21 days - only finding out that an Appeal to The Planning Inspectorate (PINS) had been lodged months later.   Because the neighbour had not filed an objection at first instance, the rules did not allow her to respond to the Appeal!The writer contacted PINS to explain the situation which was made worse as the Appellant's Planning Consultants were stressing that the neighbour had not objected at first instance and therefore there was no problem!PINS however were not satisfied that natural justice was being observed and ruled that the affected neighbour should be allowed to make her objections.The Appeal was dismissed by PINS yesterday  - please see at:https://www.dropbox.com/preview/AppealDecisionDismissedByPINS.13thMay2021.pdf?role=personalThis result vindicates the objection of the neighbour in Ashbourne Close - the road in which the Planning Department failed to put up a Public Notice!V.Mishiku  - "The Covenant Movement" vmfree@madasafish.com

Victor Mishiku ● 1636d37 Comments ● 1501d

Anyone know anything about the new "Ealing Independents" standing in the next Council Elections?

I have just emailed and asked them if they still exist and what they're doing.Will post the reply here as/when/if I receive one.     😊https://ealingindependents.com/Ealing Independents is a fast growing grassroots group set up by Ealing resident Leslie Bunder to explore the opportunity for independent candidates to contest Ealing local elections.  This is through an umbrella alliance of like-minded people standing united on a shared vision and manifesto, which Ealing Independents is developing for a better, safer, cleaner and greener Ealing for all.These independent candidates will be standing to be councillors to ensure that Ealing residents and businesses get improved and better services to improve life in Ealing and make it better, safer, cleaner and greener.The independent candidates will represent Ealing residents and businesses in Acton, Ealing, Greenford, Hanwell, Northolt, Perivale and Southall.We are not a party at present but have formed a group to support the importance independent candidates can play in local elections.Ealing Independents wants to see Ealing becomes a better place for everyone to live, work and study in.We will work to ensure Ealing becomes a be better, safer, cleaner and greener borough for all.This website serves as an introduction to Ealing Independents and will be updated on a regular basis as we develop our plans.Local independent candidates offer an alternative to the existing political parties who place national politics ahead of local people and issues in Ealing.The next local elections in Ealing for councillors will take place in May 2022.We support and will help create a true local manifesto for Ealing in time for the next election.Before then, we are listening to all residents and businesses across Ealing. We want to ensure the manifesto reflects their needs so that Ealing Council run by independents will provide better services to all.A change of council is needed, as the existing political parties have let down residents and businesses by following their own national party political agendas.Party politics has been allowed to damage Ealing and hurts residents and local businesses alike.We are people from all parts of the community united to making Ealing better after years of not being listened to by the established parties who have shown total disregard to residents and local businesses.Like so many residents and businesses, we are fed up with the way the existing council has been run. It has failed to listen to local people, not been open or transparent and provides very little accountability.We will be challenging the established parties by championing true local candidates who are not influenced by party politics but instead are driven to making Ealing a better place for residents and businesses.Ealing Independents will listen and help in supporting Ealing residents and businesses by seeking to ensure local independent candidates have the opportunity to challenge the established parties.Ealing Independents is all about putting Ealing residents and businesses first and ensuring their needs are represented and their issues are fully addressed to ensure Ealing becomes a better place for all

Rosco White ● 1510d7 Comments ● 1508d

JULIAN BELL HONESTY TEST UPDATE

Julian Bell Honesty Test.  Update. I asked Bell a simple question over a month ago.  It concerned the circumstances in which Mr Najsarek gained employment with Ealing Council?  It was: “Did you already know anything of what appeared in the press on June 30 2016 in respect of Mr Najsarek’s behaviour in Bolton when you appointed him?”  Bell must have known the answer.  All he needed to say was yes or no.   A dilemma.  If he said “yes”, he would reveal that he had been dishonest with the people of Ealing when he praised Najserak’s wonderful record of public service.  If you said “no”, he would confirm that Mr Najserak had successfully deceived his way into Ealing Council.A test of integrity for a public servant!   Not Bell.   He ignored the email.  He was guilty of a LIE BY OMISSION. As an avowed Christian, Bell, I am sure, would have been familiar with the Epistle of St James, the origin of this concept. It was his obligation as a public servant to make himself accountable.  He failed. It is was his obligation as a public servant to be honest.   It is my opinion and allegation (which I believe is supported by the simple evidence of this case) that he is a public liar and, as such, unfit for public office. I have told him to understand that every working day from now on I am asking the same question.  HOW OFTEN WILL JULIAN BELL LIE TO ANDREW FARMER?  FIVE DAYS SO FAR – AND COUNTING.

Andrew Farmer ● 1937d105 Comments ● 1571d

Julian Bell fights back claiming LTNs were popular

Interesting article in the Guardian featuring 'analysis' from Julian Bell about the Mayoral election results and what they tell us about LTNs. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jun/02/cycling-schemes-popular-with-london-voters-analysis-finds He seems to be getting a very obvious dig in at Peter Mason as the Commonplace consultation system presented a very different picture. Although the central claim of the piece, that the LTNs were actually popular and a vote winner for Labour, is nonsense the analysis does raise some very interesting points. You can reach a definitive conclusion about the popularity of LTNs based on Mayoral results. People will have voted on a whole range of issues and, time and time again research has confirmed that national politics determines how a large proportion of people vote in local elections. The LTN wards were also the Remain supporting, predominantly middle class professional wards that did so well across the country for Labour so it is a huge leap to say the result was an endorsement of the former leader's policies particularly as he was actually implementing it in partnership with a Conservative government. However, it cannot be denied that there is no evidence of a significant swing away from Labour as a result of LTNs. While it can't be claimed that the results show that LTNs are popular it also is clear that they aren't the main issue most people in the borough are concerned about at the moment. The only firm conclusion these results can really bring us to is that it is wrong to be distracted by noise made by people on social media.





Gordon Southwell ● 1618d56 Comments ● 1576d

Looking for feedback on real estate project - Under Garden apartments built by Robots

Hello everyone,I am currently on an internship for a company that is looking to help solve a number of problems related to housing in London, many of which have been exacerbated by the COVID pandemic:(1) The availability and affordability of property for those looking to relocate closer to loved ones - made all the more pressing where they may have lost a partner as a result of the pandemic.(2) New ways in which people can release value to their homes without having to sell up.(3) Solutions which might work for those living in one of the many conservation areas in Dulwich and other parts of London.(4) Something that will appreciate in value - as opposed to that of garden buildings that will depreciate over timeThe company has come up with a way (excavation robots and a sinking concrete shell) to create living/working space underground allowing the vast majority of the garden to remain in use. They are starting off by building a self-contained under garden apartment with a sunken courtyard garden, providing natural light to the whole apartment. The apartment should work as a home for elderly parents or grown up kids that would be closer to loved ones and significantly less expensive than trying to buy a property off the open market.What do you think of this idea?What problems do you see or concerns do you have?Is it something that you or someone you know might be interested in?Thank you in advance.

Mira Markova ● 1577d0 Comments ● 1577d

Proposed Uxbridge Road Cycling Measures

I don't travel along this stretch of the Uxbridge Road regularly enough to comment on the proposals which are detailed on the front page with any great authority but the thinking behind them appears sound. It is certainly the case that if you are going to be delayed on this road it will be in the town centres and therefore it doesn't seem to be too unbelievable that the dual carriageways represent spare capacity that can be better used and there is a big win if cycling can be made safer and quicker. It was interesting to learn that 80% of trips along this road are made by bus — presumably this is on a per person basis. What that means is that these changes could go badly wrong if they have an undue impact on bus travel times. The council seem to be saying that the changes will be scrapped if bus travel times are affected 'significantly' but this is not defined. My concern is that the more zealous of the pro-cycling brigade have often tended to quote quite misleading data when it comes to bus travel times when it comes to the recent Streetspace measures. We've seen statistics for whole routes for the whole day and then been told that any delays were minimal. The key data is for travel times within the affected sector of the route during the busiest parts of the day. A five minute delay in rush hour might be evened out over the course of the whole route but that is irrelevant to a bus user who has already got off. On a 20 minute trip that's a 25% increase in travel time which will encourage modal shift. As anyone who has ever used a bus can tell you, relatively short delays can lead to buses becoming very overcrowded very quickly. If the changes make travel slower and less comfortable for 80% of the users of the route then they are going to switch to other modes of transport but not all will take up cycling and many will use cars. In this case you risk the situation entering a vicious cycle — pun not intended — in which more traffic leads to fewer people using the bus. To avoid this the council needs to accurately survey the opinions of bus users and drivers and treat the data honestly not cherry picking to present an argument for a pre-determined course of action.



Gordon Southwell ● 1589d56 Comments ● 1578d

Are Ealing, Hounslow and TfL conspiring?

Most LTN streets and former streets as well as distributor and main roads have been installed with basic road monitoring cables. installed by A-T-R Ltd of York St W1.However the nature or indeed the instigator of this survey seems to be rather clouded and so far to glean any information requires a Freedom of Information enquiry.  Enquiries to both LBH and LBE have so far resulted in no response whatsoever.All the installations in both Ealing and Brentford were at the same time.  But several streets in remaining LTNs that have had steep increases in local traffic levels just trying to get in and out of their neighbourhoods have been omitted.But it all points to TfL, who also do not wish to discuss " matters of internal confidential and commercial nature". Rather odd.However what kind of survey results will clickers get?South ealing Road still has road works causing disruption, currently additional resurfacing adding to that.Swyncome Avenue remains closed with no sign of the roadworks that would render it impassable in both directions.Windmill Roads 1 week closure now has signs saying 8 weeks at both locations.Several small streets like Trent Ave have had road closed signs with minuscule works which would never require closure. ROAD CLOSED signs all over South Ealing placed where there are no closure and incorrect as it's only from 8pm but causing all manner to traffic to deviate unnecessarily.Areas where road works are causing excessive and extensive delays and exacerbated by LTN blockades not having them temporarily removed to allow even local resident access.Yet the very reason for the removal of LTN 21 was for that very problem.It's either monumental incompetence by Highways executives or is it a deliberate bit of gerrymandering to create a false picture and maximise traffic problems?Either way with all this created disruption, it's simply not going to make any survey have and credibility or valid illustration.So have these authorities, smarting from the backlash now resorting to subversive tactics and collusion?

Raymond Havelock ● 1607d2 Comments ● 1605d

Mass vaccination at Twickenham Stadium tomorrow

On Bank Holiday Monday, Twickenham Rugby Stadium will be turned into the biggest vaccination venue so far in North West London, covering residents of Brent, Ealing, Hammersmith & Fulham, Harrow, Hillingdon, Hammersmith & Fulham, Hounslow, Kensington & Chelsea and WestminsterUp to 15,000 vaccinations ready to be administered on the day both appointments and walk ins availableThis vaccination event, Let’s Tackle Covid, will give eligible residents (age 30+) the opportunity to have their first dose of the vaccination without delay. This is in response to an increase in the number of cases of coronavirus in the areaThe event will take place from 10am to 8pm on Monday 31 May at Twickenham StadiumAccording to Chelsea and Westminster Hospital who are organising the event the Pfizer vaccine will be used. For first dose only. It will take place in the open air but under coverIf you have one, remember to bring your NHS number with you. This makes registration faster if you have itSome car parking spaces are available at Rosebine Car Park (entry via A316/Chertsey Road).Disabled parking bays and pickup/drop-off points are located at Twickenham Stadium (entry via Rugby Road)Register for an appointment here:https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/lets-tackle-covid-surge-vaccination-event-registration-156925312835The full story:https://www.chelwest.nhs.uk/about-us/news/massive-vaccination-twickenham-stadium-bank-holiday-monday

Angie Gray ● 1620d2 Comments ● 1619d

Ealing Labour group imploding?

I’ve heard that a Labour Councillor, Lewis Cox, Hobbayne, resigned last night & his resignation statement doesnt make good reading, this was from another page: It’s now just over three years since I was elected a Labour councillor by the residents of Hobbayne ward. I remember that election night well. It was a huge moment of personal pride for me that the people of the community where I live would put their trust in me to look after their interests. It was also a surprise. There’s still a very real sense that people like me don’t get elected as councillors – that they don’t get elected to very much, really. But back in 2017, when I was first selected as a candidate, there was a real sense of change in the Labour Party. A sense of hope. It became possible to believe that a working-class lad from Yorkshire, working shifts as cabin crew for an airline at Heathrow might not only be able to get elected but might have a voice and something to add within the Ealing Labour Group and Council, which would make a difference and help improve people’s lives.Of course, it wasn’t all plain sailing. The establishment of the Labour Party locally (people who were leaders then and are leaders now) threw every possible obstacle they could find in the way to prevent me – and members like me – from becoming candidates, let alone councillors. I will admit, it made my victory twice as sweet when I managed to dodge those obstacles and, despite not being wanted, getting myself elected as a Labour councillor in Ealing.The only benefit to that, as far as I can tell was that it allowed me to join Labour Group with eyes wide open – to know that I’d be met with disinterest, if not open hostility, and that I’d be forever consigned to the back benches, at least until the time that I promised my vote to a candidate for Labour Group leader who did not deserve it. For ours is not a system of meritocracy, where the most qualified or most experienced are put in the Cabinet or gifted roles with responsibility-so that we might best serve the interests of residents. No – it was when I joined, and remains tonight, a system very much based on patronage, back-room deals and cronyism.I’m afraid that has very much been my experience of these past three years. Nonetheless, for much of it I have got my head down and done the work required of a ward councillor – looking after the needs of Hobbayne residents. I have tried, when I can, to challenge decisions I think are wrong and to hold the Labour Group leadership and its appointees to account. I have hoped for a time when the situation might change, when we could have a fresh leadership and be better – and do better- than we have for years. Ealing Labour is increasingly a toxic brand. Something had to change. However, not all change is good. That is a realisation that I have come to. And one which I fear the residents of Ealing are about to realise.A week ago, at Labour Group AGM, I was faced with a choice that was really no choice at all. To vote as our leader a person that had done untold damage to the reputation of Ealing Labour for year after year, or to vote for his apprentice – effectively for a person who was no less implicated in many of the bad decisions that have turned residents against us and, worse still, who played a key role in widening the divisions in the Labour Party for factional ends. Members will understand why, in the end, I voted for neither.I’ve spent a lot of time thinking this past week – about my decision but also about the outcome of that vote and what it will mean for Ealing Labour and Ealing Council – none of it good. I’ve reflected too on the bitter disappointment I feel with regard to my fellow councillors – those who didn’t take a principled stand, look at what we were being offered as a choice for Labour Group leader, and see and say ‘No, it’s simply not good enough’. Instead, I see many of those councillors tonight getting rewarded with positions and special responsibility allowances having gifted their vote. Different faces, for sure, but the same old cynical and self-serving practices as before.The easy option for me now, of course, would be to spend the next 12 months sitting quietly on the back benches while continuing to claim my councillors allowance - but for those of you who know me, know that sitting quietly isn’t one of my strengths. I also think it’s about time that one of us was honest with the people we were elected to represent. By continuing to serve under Cllr Mason- I would effectively be endorsing him and his toxic brand of politics and that is not something I am willing to do - so tonight I am informing you that I no longer feel able to serve as a Ealing Labour councillor and will be resigning as a councillor with immediate effect.I don’t regret the decision I am making, but I do regret the causes of it – that when we were presented with the opportunity to pick a new and better leader for Ealing Labour, to improve our performance and our electoral prospects, that we were unable as individuals or as a group to replace the bad with anything better.--ends--

N V Brooks ● 1632d17 Comments ● 1631d

Urgent Rethink Needed onEaling's Neighbourhood Recycling Bins To Be Removed

Big story that will sort out the pseuds among the local councilors. I think it does not come out much more hyper local than this and our green councillors should be jumping up and down to protect their local ahre of the recycling bins in their wards. No action to save them should be seem to translate into no vote in ward elections.Rather than eradicating these bins due to perceived deficiencies in dumping perhpas a consultation period with an independent consultancy to see how the recycling could be got to work.The first of the problems is that of litter bins. Take the Maytrees Rest Garden in South Ealing opposite the tube station, the bins were ALL taken away with the rational (much supported, and endorsed by Philippa Bond) of providing mixed use single bin recycling units which she advocated for the litter instead. Sadly, the point she missed was that most of what the litter bins in the parked received would get you a fine as the recycling bins only deal with specific categories of recyclable waste. So while the cardboard of a Costa Cup is recyclable, the lid is not IN EALING as it is not the right sort of plastic. The same with other LDPE plastic like plastic bags, food wrappers, and even ice lolly sticks. This results in polluted recycling which costs extra to sort and where the lollipop stick is dumping and a fineable offence. Ealing does not recycle LDPE plastic, hard plastic like PVC, polystyrene, plastic bags, and anything black and made out of plastic because the sorting machines cannot identify black plastic objects and process them.The answer to me seems to be to put more bins out there in bigger groups, however, with greater focus , e.g. carpet, mattresses, metal, wood, glass, cardbard, LDPE, HDPE, hard plastic, paper, electricals, engine oil, cooking oil, clothes, shoes and the like. Have something that produces some practical results and also deploy litter bins in parks like the Maytrees Rest Garden - the litter has to go SOMEWHERE after all!

Victor Helm ● 1634d1 Comments ● 1634d

Gunnersbury Park Bowls Club and the Sports Hub

We are delighted to see that the Sports Hub is now open. The Bowls Club wishes every success for this enterprise.For the Bowls Club, the photograph in the article is particularly poignant in that it features the bowls pavilion and bowls green. The statements from officers of LB Hounslow and LB Ealing talk of delivering "important community, sports and leisure facilities for residents in the local area" and a vision for Gunnersbury Park "where local people can enjoy sport, beautiful green spaces and a rich local history long into the future.."Meanwhile, bowling in Gunnersbury Park is facing extinction after a history of 90 years. The Community Interest Company is bent on ensuring this fate through a policy of intentional neglect.Members and supporters of the Bowls Club have repeatedly been refused access to the site to carry out extremely urgent maintenance to the green. We learned yesterday that an expert and fully accredited third party has also been refused access by the CIC. This party had very kindly offered to carry out maintenance on behalf of the Bowls Club.The planning application from Putt in the Park has yet to be determined by Hounslow Planning Committee. We believe that by the time this decision is made, whether it is to refuse or to permit, the bowls green will be beyond repair.You may, as does the Bowls Club, wonder how it has been possible to arrive at this situation in what is, after all, a public park which was conceived to be for the benefit of the entire community.

Jim Storrar ● 1666d3 Comments ● 1665d

My Heroes Seema Misra and Jo Hamilton

Readers may be able to help. The ladies above were caught-up in the Sub-postmasters scandal in which the accounting computer system and the management failed. This caused Seema to be imprisoned and Jo to have to choose by pleading guilty to false accounting in order to escape the more serious charge of theft. There had been redacting and shredding of data to hide the innocence of these ladies. Those who had done this should go to prison. Why were the police not immediately involved? The possible charge was theft after all and so the police could have taken individuals in the post office management for interfering with the evidence. The police are the gatekeepers of part of the legal system and appear reluctant to become involved in rip-offs by authority. Something similar happened in Ealing when some motorists were not electronically reminded that their CPZ resident parking permit was due for renewal. Some residents were reimbursed but how many were not? And now we have the council charging otherwise law abiding motorists for passing through very unusual LTN barriers. The LBE officers who I spoke to last week at the Culmington Road barrier said that all the signage was in order under the signage legislation (when it wasn't) and I said the message wasn't getting through evidenced by the enormous numbers of motorists being charged. The evidence told the story and one of the officers flounced off. End of meeting. This fraudulent abuse of power and entrapment must stop. The police have to act as it brings all authority into disrepute. Gatekeepers in the police heirarcy and there are many are rejecting this in that it has nothing to do with them. That's not right.

Arthur Breens ● 1688d2 Comments ● 1680d

Gunnersbury Park Bowls Club - Petition

The Gunnersbury Park Community Interest Company has refused to grant access by the Bowls Club to the bowls green to carry out urgent maintenance work.Some readers may wish to sign this petition:https://petitions.hounslow.gov.uk/GPBowlsClub/Our request is that all councillors, whether members of the Planning Committee or not, should seek to use their good offices to persuade the CIC to allow the Bowls Club access to the bowls green.Gunnersbury Estate (2026) Community Interest Company (the CIC) is responsible for the management of Gunnersbury Park on behalf of the joint owners, the London Boroughs of Hounslow and Ealing.In April 2020 a planning application was refused for the conversion of the bowls clubhouse to a cafe/restaurant. In January 2021, a decision on a further, almost identical, planning application was deferred by Hounslow Planning Committee. This proposal would lead to the re-purposing of the bowls green as a mini-golf facility which would mean the end of bowls in Gunnersbury Park after 90 years.In deferring their decision, the Planning Committee wished to have more time to consider all of the relevant facts, including the consideration of alternative sites for the mini-golf facility.The Bowls Club and volunteers from the wider community have been refused access by the CIC to carry out urgent maintenance work. Without this work the bowls green will rapidly deteriorate to a condition beyond repair and this will mean that the Planning Committee will be faced with a situation where bowls is no longer a viable use for the site of the bowls green.The Bowls Club is not opposed to the establishment of a mini-golf facility in the Park. Indeed, it supports the principle of this important source of revenue for the CIC but not at the expense of the bowls green and the Bowls Club itself.

Jim Storrar ● 1707d14 Comments ● 1687d

DISHONEST TRADING.

Misleading information provided by energy switching company Look After My Bills to the public has been addressed by the Advertising Standards Authority. Below is a post shared by Nick Blagg, a member of:                                                                                                                                                                        "Look After My Bills Problem Reporting Page."                                                                                                                                                     Nick Blagg shared a link.The complaint made to the advertising standards agency against LAMB has been upheld !! It feels like a partial victory to me based on what the ruling is (see below) but it’s still a win and the more of us that continue to complain the more pressure is applied.  Keep it up guys. 👍🏻Dear Mr Blagg,Thank you for your continued patience.  Further to the below, we received another complaint which raised issues similar to those highlighted in your complaint.  Based on the information you and the other complainant provided, we considered that advertising content from Look After My Bills was likely to break the advertising rules we apply.  Therefore, we contacted the advertiser to ask for their assurance that future ads do not misleadingly imply that users of the service will have access to every single energy company and every single energy deal on the market.  They have provided this assurance.This now resolves your complaint, and the case will be closed.  Basic information including the advertiser’s name and where the ad appeared will be published on www.asa.org.ukThank you for bringing this matter to our attention.Kind regards,JamesJames JonesComplaints ExecutiveDirect Line 020 7492 2214Please note, I do not work on FridaysAdvertising Standards AuthorityCastle House, 37-45 Paul StreetLondon EC2A 4LSTelephone 020 7492 2222

Neil Milkins ● 1696d0 Comments ● 1696d

Gas and electric suppliers.

ENERGY SUPPLIERS.Because I haven't got a head for figures I have stuck with SSE Swalek for 47 years. But owing to Look After My Bills without my permission signing me up to Utility Point in October 2021, I have had the opportunity to try and figure out which energy provider gives the best deal. I have learned that using switching companies provides the worst deals and leave behind a trail of stress. For instance Look  After My Bills and Utility Point for 4 months have both blamed each other and both have launched an investigation into the mess they have dropped me in. And the situation has not been resolved with 2 BBC consumer programmes investigating hundreds if not thousands of complaints against these 2 companies.My energy provider for 47 years, SSE had suggested that I start off with them as a new customer and on 12-1-21 a contract was agreed with a customer service agent emailing me the following details."Good day Mr Milkins,This is to confirm the effective start date with Swalec-SSE is the 29 January 2021 to take over the gas and electricity supply.This means that you will only be charged from the date mentioned above going forward. All other charges will be applied by your current supplier until the date your supply starts with Swalec-SSE.Thank you.Regards,Yolanda."Hooray. Then I get the following  email from Jolene from SSE on 20-1-20."I understand that you have been sent an email regarding the dates the supply has come back to us and you were advised that you would not have a bill until SSE started [29-1-21], feedback is being provided to that adviser so this incorrect information is not given in the future, for this I can offer a goodwill payment of £30.00 for incorrect information given. SSE can keep their £30 !!!!!!!!!!I have now learned how easy it is to find the cheapest deal for gas and electric. Find a company offering a 2 year fixed tariff which I have done. To date, the best deal offers a 2 year fixed tariff.                                 For gas, the daily standing charge is 27 pence per day. The charge for gas is 2.952 pence per kw hour.For electric, the standing charge is 24.02 pence per day. The charge for electric is 17.42 per kw hour.These prices are considerably cheaper than my former supplier. If anyone can direct me to a better deal, please let me know as haven't signed up to EDF yet.

Neil Milkins ● 1749d5 Comments ● 1716d

Shameful Gunnersbury Park CIC

Surely Ealing and Hounslow Councils need to call an enquiry into just how Gunnersbury Park is being run.Clearly, it is far from interested in being a community organisation but obsessed with their own agenda and rather deluded.The way in which the Bowls club, a long established club accessible for all, at costs that local people can afford, self financing, run and maintained fully by members for the past 25 years as a result of the complete failure of Ealing and Hounslow to maintain this parks facilities for near 50 years is nasty, ageist and wholly conceited.The silence from Ealing Councillors is yet again, underlining how ageist and removed they are from local community.  Hounslow councillors fare little better but at least have become aware that something fishy is going on with this Organisation.Far too many cosy arrangements to be healthy.I understand that somehow, this Organisation is exempt from any form of open access from Freedom of Information to public accountability. And yet they are funded by grants, awards and ultimately source from taxpayers and public money. None of which has found it's way to the Bowls club or other basic aspects of this park.  But above average salaries for those within the CiC and it's associates remain.Truly appalling. Local people, whether they be interested in Bowls or not, or how a public park with public amenities is being turned into a commercialised profit centre at the expense of basic amenities affordable and accessible for all ought to be asking their elected representatives to ask questions.Bowls is a multicultural genteel sport played all over the world. It is reviving and can be played from a young age right through to old age. Not many Sports than can accommodate that.When it's gone it's gone. A proper sports facility, a public amenity replaced by a Fast food outlet and a sideshow crazy golf. That's not a sport or a public amenity. It is a profit business.Did this not happen with Walpole Park and a Coffee Hut? That was another case of bullying and closed door dealing. And it went wrong. Very Wrong.Especially now that we are being told by authorities to walk, cycle and stay local.

Raymond Havelock ● 1725d8 Comments ● 1722d

Look After My Bills Nightmare.

This is a post from today (Monday 8 February) put on the Facebook page, Look After My Bills Problem Reporting Page by B**** Orm***"After initially being attracted by the promise of finding consumers the best market deal and starting the registration process, I read some worrying reviews and immediately cancelled - told LAMB that I had changed my mind and did not want them to look after my bills. Subsequently I continued to receive emails saying I had been transferred, causing me grief and frustration. I again informed them that I did not want LAMB to look after my bills and also emailed my current supplier to tell them I did not want LAMB to transfer me and that I wished to remain with Coop Energy. LAMB continued to email me about my transfer. What a nightmare! Fortunately Coop Energy stepped in on my behalf. This was quite some time ago and I continued to receive email from them but I have blocked them. Neil I wish you luck. Once they get their claws in you they fill your life with worry and anxiety. Relentless!"                                                                                                                                                                     For some reason, Money Saving Expert Martin Lewis on Saturday 6 February urged energy users to use switching companies such as Look After My Bills to try to get cheaper energy.                               All I can say is, before you consider doing this look at the Facebook groups page Look after My Bills Problem Reporting Page and Trustpilot, Look After My Bills reviews before making a decision you may regret for months to come.

Neil Milkins ● 1731d2 Comments ● 1731d

More ANPR cameras to be installed LTN 30 is a problem

Thank you Ealingtoday for reporting this. I am not a road traffic professional but I worked in the safety industry and carried a Home Office warrant for some time and took courses at university in the psychology of perception. I've held a clean licence for 55years.I would strongly recommend the council review this ANPR camera at least before rushing to put in more. 1)There are 4 routes to the barrier in Culmington Road yet only one speed camera warning sign. That one is positioned after the camera at the barrier. In normal life warnings are given BEFORE the danger i.e. before the camera that allows the message to sink-in and appropriate action be taken.  The camera sign is often linked to speed cameras and many motorists probably check their speedometer when they see one; a dangerous detraction. 2)There are warning signs "No access to Culmington Road ahead except cycles". For strangers that means nothing. One sign is even sited IN Culmington Road. Strangers won't know what it means and even the Council have made 3 road name mistakes in public notices. These are "unique signs" and have to be interpreted by the motorist. Standard signs showing road closed ahead would have been cheaper and carried more information at a glance. Motorists absorb standard signs without thinking; subliminally. There should have been standard signs on each of the 4 limbs approaching this junction. To be continued

Arthur Breens ● 1756d36 Comments ● 1736d

Ealing's reliance on parking fine income betrays Labour party principles

Probably not a surprise that Ealing is one of the highest issuer of parking fines in the country according to a report on currently on this site. Judging by a ticket place on a car parked near my home, enforcement continues unabated despite the supposed lockdown.It is no longer worth pretending these fines don't act as a local tax with the revenue being used to cover the shortfall in Council Tax and government grant funding.PCNs are not adjusted for income so you get the same for parking in the wrong place at the wrong time if you have a Fiat Uno or a Ferrari. It will be argued that as the very poorest in society don't tend to own cars then as a tax this is a reasonably point. However, people who need to use cars for their work will tend to be on below or around average income with a large proportion of fines going to those in the building trade, carers, minicab or delivery drivers.Better off drivers probably make up the bulk of people who successfully appear these fines.Some will say that it is a voluntary tax and if you can't afford to pay it obey the rules. Our family have received two parking fines over the last decade in Ealing - in both cases we had thought we had parked correctly in areas we were familiar with but the signs were misleading. Appeals were dismissed out of hand and no attempt was made to improve the signage. Very few people parking in Ealing will do so on the basis they hope to get away with it because by now most are aware how intensive enforcement is so most fines are issued to people who have made a genuine mistake.This effectively means that the parking fines operate as a highly regressive tax something that is directly opposed to the founding principles of the Labour party. Yet it seems to be Labour authorities, like Ealing that use this most as a method of raising finance. I appreciate that this is a challenging time for council finances but the over dependence of this borough on this form of income is not healthy or fair on residents.

Mark Evans ● 1750d8 Comments ● 1743d

FUNERAL ARRANGEMENTS.

FUNERAL ARRANGEMENTS.For some people it is not bearable to think about, or to plan for their own funeral or for that of their spouse. However in these uncertain times I believe it is a responsible thing to do to take some of the pressure and grief off family members by not leaving things to late. Myself and my wife have taken steps to leave very little for our family members to worry about regarding these arrangementsWe have taken steps to arrange Pure Cremation funerals which was catapulted into the news a few years ago by singer David Bowie. For instance, if I die first, my wife will contact a funeral director in Hampshire. They will take care of all the arrangements needed. I would be collected from my home or from anywhere else and taken to Hampshire to to the funeral director's own private crematorium for disposal. No flowers, no family present and no funeral service. Arrangements have already been made for a memorial service shortly after my death.The benefits of doing things this way is that the cost to my wife and family is minimal. If I die at home the cost of the complete funeral arrangement is £1195.00 or £1.445 if I die in hospital or nursing home. The average cost of a cremation funeral in the UK is £3,986, sometimes thousands more.Being a very competitive business I am sure that some funeral directors would charge less than £1195.00.Nobody wants to die, but time and unforeseen events befall us all. In the mean time wash your hands and socially distance.

Neil Milkins ● 1745d0 Comments ● 1745d

Government says public should have right to ask councils to release land for redevelopment.

The government has published for consultation proposals that would enable the public to challenge councils and other public bodies to release underused land for redevelopment.The ‘right to regenerate’ proposals mean that underused public land could be sold to individuals or communities by default – unless there is a “compelling reason” for the owner to keep itPublic bodies would need to demonstrate clear plans for the land in the near future – even if it is a temporary use before later development. If it were kept for long without being used, it would have to be sold.The rights would also apply to unused publicly owned social housing and garages. The government notes that the latest figures show there were more than 25,000 vacant council-owned homes and recent Freedom of Information data shows there were more 100,000 empty council-owned garages last year.The government says it wishes to provide local communities with an opportunity to “transform eyesores” into something they want in their area. It builds on government work to encourage development on brownfield land.Jenrick said: “Right to regenerate is the simple way to turn public land into public good, with land sold by default unless there is a very compelling reason not to do so.“We are cutting through red tape so that communities can make better use of available land and derelict buildings, which means more new homes, businesses and community assets.“Millions of people will now be able to buy that empty property, unused garage or parcel of land and turn it into something good for them and their community.”Tom Chance, chief executive of the National Community Land Trust Network, welcomed the idea.“There are hundreds of community land trusts across the country wanting to build much-needed affordable housing, but getting hold of land at an affordable price is a huge barrier.“The potential for communities to be given first right of refusal could be a game changer. We encourage everyone to read through the proposals and respond to the consultation.”Ian Harvey, executive director of Civic Voice, added: “Across the country, communities see land that remains empty and wonder why. They imagine how it could be used for communities – from green space, to housing – but when they enquire about enhancing the space it’s never clear who owns it.“If a community has a viable use for this land, they must be given the opportunity to take these ideas forward.“The ‘right to regenerate’ is a great step forward to build on previous attempts at doing this and we believe it will increase the chance for communities to come together to bring vacant land into the heart of the community. We look forward to working with communities on this latest community right.”The consultation, which closes on 13 March, can be found here on the UK Government website.18 January 2021Laura Edgar, The Plannerhttps://www.planningportal.co.uk/news/article/750/planning_news_-_21_january_2021?utm_source=PPQ+Newsletter&utm_campaign=efc81fca0a-Newsletter_11072019_HTML_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_734e0b63a9-efc81fca0a-7282665#two

Rosco White ● 1749d0 Comments ● 1749d

Look After My Bills Nightmare.

To save people the agony of having to deal with a future nightmare  with Look After My Bills and Utility Point please read their horrendous reviews on Trustpilot.                                  This is an email I received from Trustpilot this week.                                                People are reading your review!Hi Neil Milkins,You recently wrote a review on Trustpilot and it looks like people find it helpful.117 people have already read your review.                                                                                                       LOOK AFTER MY BILLS SHAMBLES.It is now 12 weeks since Look After My Bills without my knowledge or permission changed my energy provider from S.S.E. to Utility Point. Jacqueline Loughman promised me 9 weeks ago that they would resolve the matter within 14 days. A week ago their senior complaints manager Daniel promised me he would phone me on (29-12-20) and have the matter resolved. No phone call and no answer to my emails to him. In the meantime I am going to have a sky high electric and gas bill when this matter is resolved. It is near impossible to get a reply from them once you have emailed and phoned them and it is totally impossible to phone Utility Point as ALL their phone lines have been cut off. I have been on the phone and emailing 19 hours in total trying to sort this mess out. Anyone thinking of going with Look After My Bills or Utility Point please check their horrendous reviews on Trustpilot.

Neil Milkins ● 1769d14 Comments ● 1758d

Renaming Havelock Road Council corruption

Renaming Havelock Road may be a trivial issue. The way it was achieved is an illustration of how Ealing Council at its highest level goes about its business: dishonestly. The decision to rename the road Havelock Road was made by “two pillars of the community”, Julian Bell, Council Leader, and Paul Najserak, CEO.   Bell suggested the idea (10.6.20.)  Why?  He doesn’t live on the road or in Southall.   ANSWER:  he depends on Southall councillors for support and is in the pay of the local MP.    Self-interest. On 14.7.20 the matter appeared on the agenda of the Cabinet, never having been discussed by them before.  The Cabinet had it all done and dusted there and then.   They decided a council officer could make the decision. Democracy?  No. Decisions should be made by our elected representatives, not by council employees.  Paul Najserak made the decision.  Between Bell making the suggestion and Najserak making the decision what occurred appears to be a conspiracy to subvert due process so that Southall could be given what Southall wanted -  FREE.FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST I have been trying to get straight answers about what occurred for weeks.  I am still trying. A Freedom of information Request is needed to secure the minutes of meetings and internal memoranda. I believe someone has already made one.  If that person is reading this, would they please let us know the result - if there was one.Meanwhile: LETTER SENT TO BELL “Dear Julian Bell, Why did the Cabinet deal with renaming Havelock Road rather than leaving it to a resident to make an application?   There was no reason a resident could not do so and it is the routine way for such applications to happen?  Your sincerely, Andrew Farmer”

Andrew Farmer ● 1794d10 Comments ● 1761d

Ealing Planning! Object extension of further storey in the modern house in quiet Oxford Road

IMPORTANT!Dear Neighbours, it's Yulia from the Grove.As you may know, the modern house on 69 Oxford Rd has submitted a planning application to Ealing Council to build a further storey on top of their existing building, despite the original planning application being for a single storey onlyThe application is very professional and has gone through pre-consultation with the Council. So it will be hard to stop. The Plannint Case Officer (Smruti Patel) has confirmed that the number of objections will make a big difference to the case for blocking planning permission. So far only 10 objections have been received - we ideally need 50-60Possible grounds for objection:- overdevelopment - out of character with surrounding conservation area - potential for reduced parking- reduced light for gardens close to the property- sets a precedent for other modern developments in the conservation arePLEASE SUBMIT AN OBJECTION - it only takes 2 mins to write 1-2 lines in your own words referring to the grounds of objection abovehttps://pam.ealing.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=makeComment&keyVal=QHS9ZZJMFX500The link above is where you submit your objection. You need to fill in your personal details. Select 'neighbour' for 'commenter type', select 'object' for 'stance' and then tick the following boxes under 'reason for comment': close to adjoining properties // development too high // inadequate parking provision

Yulia Chaplina ● 1800d6 Comments ● 1785d

A moste interestinge article with which I (of course!) heartily agree:-

However, we do live, currently, and despite the concerted efforts of many, in a free speaking society, and this is a Forum, so all opinions and comments are welcome to debate!https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-9057393/CALVIN-ROBINSON-Good-riddance-bunkum-unconscious-race-bias-classes.htmlDaily Mail / Calvin RobinsonPUBLISHED: 23:19, 15 December 2020 | UPDATED: 23:21, 15 December 2020As diversity lessons for the civil service are scrapped, it's good riddance to the bunkum of 'unconscious race-bias' classes.Despite huge demographic changes in recent decades, our political system has not been scarred by extremism, nor has our society been gripped by racial discord.Britain is a remarkably tolerant country with an impressive record on integration.Despite huge demographic changes in recent decades, our political system has not been scarred by extremism, nor has our society been gripped by racial discord.Our national spirit of openness is precisely why so many migrants wish to settle here.It is therefore a bitter paradox that this success story is being undermined by a small minority who pose as the champions of anti-racism but who only promote friction as they seek to paint Britain as a land wracked by bigotry.The great American civil rights leader Dr Martin Luther King urged that, in the fight for equality, people should ‘not be judged by the colour of their skin, but by the content of their character’.TwistedBut today’s self-styled ‘anti-racists’ have turned that ideal on its head, holding that we should all be defined by our ethnicity. In their twisted narrative, colour blindness is not a virtue but a vice.This divisive outlook is reflected in the fashion for ‘unconscious bias training’, now common in British workplaces, especially in the public sector.Such training — which can range from lectures to online tests — aims to root out any hidden prejudices that may inadvertently influence staff behaviour or decisions.That may sound like politically correct nonsense. But, in recent years, even our political class has succumbed to it.Since 2014, when completing four ‘modules’ in diversity and inclusion training became a requirement for all Whitehall staff, 170,000 civil servants have undergone it.And in the summer, at the height of the Black Lives Matter protests, Sir Keir Starmer decided all Labour Party employees should undergo such instruction.But now a welcome stand has been made by the Government against this fad.Yesterday, the Cabinet Office announced that ‘unconscious- bias training’ will be scrapped for the civil service, after an internal review found the courses did nothing for equality and, in some cases, were even counter-productive as they fuelled resentment.In the present institutionalised fervour about race, the decision is a bold one.But it is absolutely correct. For the review is only the latest in a string of reports that confirm that bias training is, put simply, a load of bunkum.In 2018, the Equality and Human Rights Commission found the evidence for the ‘ability [of unconscious bias training] to change behaviour is limited’.A year later, the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development declared that the courses in bias ‘had no sustained impact on behaviour’.This is hardly surprising given that the whole method is profoundly flawed and riddled with contradictions.It supposedly celebrates diversity, but demands rigid conformity with its dogma. Its ostensible purpose is to build harmony, but its bullying, hectoring tone causes hostility and defensiveness.Stereotypes are denounced under the doctrine, yet sweeping generalisations are made about white people. It preaches responsibility for personal actions, yet infantilises and patronises users.This was highlighted by a recent such course in Parliament, where MPs were lectured by a diversity consultant using a glove puppet.More importantly, it has no intellectual basis of any substance.Calvin Robinson: The great American civil rights leader Dr Martin Luther King urged that, in the fight for equality, people should ‘not be judged by the colour of their skin, but by the content of their character’ +3Calvin Robinson: The great American civil rights leader Dr Martin Luther King urged that, in the fight for equality, people should ‘not be judged by the colour of their skin, but by the content of their character’First developed in the 1990s from the Implicit Association Test, a tool for ‘psychological diagnosis’ developed by American social psychologists, it is a hopelessly unreliable pseudo-science, like astrology or phrenology (the belief that character can be assessed from the shape of the head).That lack of credibility stems from the fact that its primary purpose is not scientific at all, but political: namely, to be used by cultural warriors to ensure that everyone conforms to their world view.Queen Elizabeth I famously declared that she had ‘no desire to make windows into men’s souls’. For her, as long as her subjects obeyed the law, she did not care what they thought privately.That has been the British tradition for centuries.But bias trainers have a very different approach.Like the Thought Police of George Orwell’s novel 1984, they want to control minds by delving into the unconscious, where they would like to eradicate unpalatable ideas and impose compliance.And as with any attempt to change people’s thinking, the premise behind unconscious-bias training only operates in one direction, where white people are the eternal oppressors and ethnic minorities the permanent victims.It is inconceivable that on any course a black or Asian client would be berated by a trainer for showing prejudice against a white colleague.This one-sided attitude also gives rise to the racially charged concept of ‘white privilege’, which is not only nasty but absurd.A white supermarket shelf stacker has far less wealth and power than a successful black barrister or an Asian medical consultant.GuiltBut the bias trainers set a trap for anyone who dares to challenge them.They refer to ‘white fragility’ to describe any negative reaction to any accusations of racial prejudice.Surprise, surprise — their white clients can never win.If they submit, they are admitting to their guilt as unconscious racists. If they refuse, they are attacked for being in denial, too ‘fragile’ to handle the truth.Either way, the bias trainers — who charge a minimum of £300-an-hour for the opportunity to hector their customers — end up laughing all the way to the bank.One consultancy I came across yesterday charges a £1,750 fee for a day’s course in ‘unconscious bias and cross-cultural training’. But this mix of indoctrination and cash-grabbing has to end.Pictured: Femi Otitoju with ‘UB’ puppet, that is said to be used in the 'unconscious bias' training given to MPs in a course designed by Challenge Consultancy +3Pictured: Femi Otitoju with ‘UB’ puppet, that is said to be used in the 'unconscious bias' training given to MPs in a course designed by Challenge ConsultancyThat is why the Government’s decision yesterday was so welcome and could mark a turning point in the fight back against the spread of the pernicious woke agenda.The Tories have been in power for ten successive years and, after the last election triumph, enjoy an 80-seat majority in the Commons.Yet they have been astonishingly timid about defending liberalism and British values against the race-obsessed minority who have held sway for far too long.While, of course, there remain inequalities that need addressing, this cause has come to predominate in civic life.Museums are browbeaten into removing statues, schools into ‘decolonising’ their lessons.The National Trust, which has entirely succumbed to the PC onslaught, recently drew up a list of shame, featuring historic properties that have links to British imperialism or the slave trade.LaughableSome of the grievances would be laughable were they not so offensive.Only last month, the late Poet Laureate Ted Hughes was denounced because one of his distant ancestors had a connection to slavery.Meanwhile, without any sense of irony at all, Prince Harry, a self-appointed high priest of the diversity cult, has the nerve to lecture us about white privilege.Even the much-cherished British pastime of horticulture is in the dock, with BBC Countryfile presenter James Wong declaring last week that ‘UK gardening culture has racism baked into its DNA’.Welcome to the mad world of contemporary ‘anti-racism’, where even pruning the roses may be a thought crime.The Government’s decision is a much-needed blow for sanity against such lunacy.Britain is a great country with so much that people of all races can celebrate.We cannot allow its appeal to be destroyed by fanatics bent on whipping up racial disunity for their own self-serving ends.Calvin Robinson is a former teacher and now governor at a London state school.

Rosco White ● 1786d0 Comments ● 1786d

No 15 Blakesley Avenue W5 - Planning enforcement

No 15 Blakesley Avenue has appealed to the Sec of State against the enforcement notice issued by Ealing Council. This is the property that has breached planning regs and built a single storey rear extension and an unauthorised enlargement of a basement extension. They are continuing to build and no doubt the plan is to use the property as self contained flats without permission. This is similar to no 59 Eaton Rise where the application was to convert a family home into 7 self contained flats. Don't let this one set the precedent for the others and whilst it may not be happening on your doorstep today, large family homes are being lost more and more to scrupulous property developers who think they have found a way to make money by overdeveloping into these spaces, with or without permission.If you can help preserve our conservation area please forward to neighbours and friends in the Ealing area and if they wish to comment on the appeal, please can you do so online at https://www.gov.uk/appeal-enforcement-notice/comment-on-an-appeal or you can email your comments to teame1@planninginspectorate.gov.uk or a letter can be sent to The Planning Inspectorate, Room 3/23A, Temple Quay House, 2 The Square, Bristol BS1 6PN. The appeal ref to quote is APP/A5270/C/20/3258722. LAST DATE TO RESPOND 5 JANUARY 2021.An application for planning has just been made by no 13 Blakesley Avenue (neighbours of the above and we suspect related parties) to convert a same double fronted home into 8 self contained flats. Again if you can please ask friends and family, neighbours to lodge their comments at https://pam.ealing.gov.uk/online-applications/PLAN/204232FULThanks for all your help neighbours! Please forward and share on all social media sites.

Rukhi Sohi ● 1799d2 Comments ● 1799d

How other boroughs do it better

The Future of the Great British Town Hall – everywhere but Ealing “There is no alternative but to talk to the representatives of the community who are actively going to participate in this [civic building] long after we as architectural practitioners have moved on to other things. The term I use? ‘Ruthlessly inclusive’” – Ivan Harbour, Senior Partner, Rogers Stirk Harbour + Partners Town Halls are architectural icons from an era of optimism and utopia, which aimed to give power back to local communities. Whilst the buildings still carry those founding principles, there is a perception that they have lost their connection to the community and many have fallen into disrepair.Local Authorities, but not Ealing, are increasingly finding inventive ways to reverse this decline by re-imagining town halls, re-establishing them as public assets, and often successfully placing them at the centre of local regeneration and industrial growth strategies.Ealing council have closed the local town halls in the borough leaving only Ealing. Ealing borough residents were not consulted about the future of the old Town Tall and had only a brief chance to view some boards in the Broadway Centre, the done deal for Perceval House. Unlike the boroughs in this webinar our Illustrious Leader and his cabal of nodding donkeys have no vision.  Senior council officers share responsibility, they are employed to adviseThis webinar shows what can be done. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdMYHiW-Ev4&feature=emb_logo

Libby Kemp ● 1810d2 Comments ● 1806d

Something Fishy About The Brexit Negotiations

The PM is disappearing off into the attic room in 10 Downing Street just as the Brexit policy he has championed is reaching a crisis point. He is now insisting on a rigorous interpretation of the rules having been exposed to Covid-19 because he had previously been totally unbothered about adhering to them. Whether this is because he wanted sometime away from Princess Nut Nuts or was hoping to catch up with The Crown and Breaking Bad we won't find out until he publishes his memoirs but whatever the reason his competence has once again been proven sorely wanting. Bad as the pandemic is, there is good reason to believe that a no deal Brexit would have more dire consequences for this country in the longer term. By Spring we hopefully will have a vaccine but the deleterious consequences of having no proper trading agreement with our neighbours will last for decades. The two things that seem to be driving us to no deal are the UK's government insistence on state aid and the issue of fishing. I can't begin to understand why a Conservative government would deem state aid to be so important — what on earth would Mrs Thatcher think? It was her driving forward the single market that significantly reduced government support across Europe for ailing industries and made the EU much more internationally competitive. I originally thought fishing was more straightforward. Although it is a tiny industry, fair enough that this country should be able to control its own waters. However, I now learn that most fishermen or fisherpeople as we now apparently must call them, don't want to leave the EU. This is because it has started to become clear that although British trawlers will be able to catch more fish, there will be nobody to buy it. We eat a relatively small proportion of the fish caught in domestic waters and the EU bought a large amount. These exports would now be subject to tariffs. Worse still more people are employed in processing fish than there are catching them and when a non-British ship currently brings in a haul from British waters it will go to our fish processing plants which are the largest in Europe. These ships will no longer bring their catch onshore because they would then be subject to tariffs so they will be processed in facilities in the EU. Because the catch of British ships alone will not be sufficient to make up the difference, so some of the processing facilities will inevitably close leading to large scale job losses in the industry. Is there anybody who still supports Brexit who can explain to me why if, even if the only industry supposedly benefiting from all this is being harmed, why we are going down this road other than the man supposed to be at the wheel has bu**ered off just when he is needed.




Gordon Southwell ● 1815d5 Comments ● 1809d

The War for Johnson's Ear

For anyone who has had the misfortune to study Tudor court politics what is happening in Number 10 seems depressingly familiar. Weak and incapacitated leadership from the top is leading to factions vying for power. It hasn't been stated explicitly in any of the news reports I have seen on this so far but it is difficult not to conclude that the Biden election victory has set this all off. Channel 4 did some proper investigative journalism to show the extent to which former members of the very small Vote Leave team now dominate at the Cabinet Office and Number 10.  This country has already had its reputation sullied by the current government but appointing someone who is best known for dressing up as a chicken as Chief of Staff would clearly have been a step too far. Channel 4 highlighted how the current cabinet has effectively been rendered powerless by the Cummings cliques grip on power so it has been left to the only apparent adult left in the room, Carrie Symonds, to act. The only possible argument for a no deal Brexit was that it would allow a transformative deal with the US which would partially compensate for the economic damage done. Biden may have called Johnson before other European leaders but it wasn't a sign of favour but to issue a warning about the Internal Market Bill and the Good Friday Agreement. Johnson has been told that if he continues on this path he will be very much on his on and it will be no deal with the US as well as with Europe which would be an economic disaster several levels up from what would have happened if we left without a deal under Trump. Today it looks alarmingly like a hostage situation is developing in Downing Street with Cummings and David Frost threatening to resign if Johnson doesn't stick to their programme. He may be tempted to give into their demands because a u-turn now would mean he would have to go back on all the pledges he made  after being elected.  However, there is some cause for optimism because it is hard to thing of a pledge that Johnson hasn't gone back on and there are signs that even a cabinet handpicked for their loyalty to Brexit are increasingly realising the current path is the one to national ruination. That said, if Cummings isn't out by the end of today I think it will be a very bad sign.

Gordon Southwell ● 1820d2 Comments ● 1815d